FROM  THE  LIBRARY  OF 


REV.  LOUIS  FITZGERALD  BENSON.  D.  D. 


BEQUEATHED  BY  HIM  TO 
THE  LIBRARY  OF 

PRINCETON  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY 


Division 

^57X 


Section 


THE  HISTORY  OF  MUSIC 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2016 


https://archive.org/details/histmusiOOprat 


The  Organ  at  Haarlem. 


THE 


HISTORY  OF  MUSIC 


A HANDBOOK  AND  GUIDE 
FOR  STUDENTS 


BY 

WALDO  SELDEN  PRATT 


PROFESSOR  OF  MUSIC  AND  HYMNOLOGY  IN  HARTFORD  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY 
LECTURER  ON  MUSIC  HISTORY  AT  SMITH  COLLEGE  AND  AT  THE  INSTITUTE  OF  MUSICAL  ART 
AUTHOR  OF  “MUSICAL  MINISTRIES  IN  THE  CHURCH” 


NEW  YORK 

G.  SCHIRMER,  35  UNION  SQUARE 


1908 


Copyright,  1907,  by 
G.  SCHIRMER 
19851 


PREFATORY  NOTE 


The  present  book  is  the  outgrowth  of  a fragmentary  syllabus 
for  classes  that  was  issued  in  1897.  It  is  meant  to  be  distinctly 
a book  of  reference  for  students  rather  than  a literary  or  criti- 
cal survey  of  a few  salient  aspects  of  the  subject,  or  a specialist’s 
report  of  original  research.  Aiming  at  a certain  degree  of 
encyclopaedic  fullness,  it  brings  together  facts  and  conclusions 
from  a great  variety  of  sources.  Much  labor  has  been  expended 
in  grouping  the  material  in  such  a way  as  to  give  a systematic 
impression  of  the  enormous  field  in  view.  In  many  cases  some- 
what full  lists  and  summaries  of  details  are  given,  partly  to 
provide  means  for  easy  reference,  partly  to  suggest  how  multi- 
farious are  the  facts,  and  sometimes  to  indicate  upon  what  sort 
of  data  are  based  the  general  statements  that  are  offered.  At 
every  point  an  effort  is  made  to  emphasize  the  leading  tenden- 
cies or  movements  of  musical  advance,  referring  to  particular 
styles  and  composers  as  illustrations. 

It  was  originally  intended  to  include  fairly  exhaustive  bib- 
liographies, and  a great  amount  of  material  was  collected ; but 
the  magnitude  of  this  branch  of  the  subject  precluded  its 
presentation  in  this  volume.  In  connection  with  each  period 
in  the  history,  however,  a brief  statement  is  made  concerning 
the  musical  literature  of  the  time,  but  without  any  attempt  at 
completeness. 

This  is  not  in  any  sense  a history  of  instruments,  but  some 
hints  are  given  of  the  range  and  interest  of  the  topic,  both  by 
statements  in  the  text  and  by  illustrations  of  selected  specimens. 
The  latter  are  drawn  from  the  well-known  collections  of  the 
Metropolitan  Museum  in  New  York  and  of  the  University  of 
Michigan  at  Ann  Arbor,  to  the  custodians  of  which  the  hearti- 
est thanks  are  due  for  multiplied  courtesies. 

7 


8 


PREFATORY  NOTE 


In  arranging  the  material  for  presentation,  specially  helpful 
suggestions  have  been  derived  from  Prosniz’  “ Compendium  der 
Musikgeschichte  ” and  Riemann’s  “ Geschichte  der  Musik  seit 
Beethoven.”  For  the  statistical  facts  recourse  has  been  had 
to  a variety  of  authorities,  chief  of  which  is  the  colossal  “ Quellen- 
Lexikon  der  Musiker”  of  Eitner. 

Every  acknowledgment  is  also  made  of  the  liberality  of  the 
publishers  in  making  the  book  rich  and  attractive,  and  for  the 
invaluable  assistance  of  the  several  advisers  whose  criticisms 
have  been  helpful  in  bringing  the  text  into  its  final  shape. 

In  a work  of  this  character  the  number  of  names  and  dates  is 
necessarily  great,  and,  in  spite  of  every  effort,  errors  can  hardly 
be  avoided.  The  indication  of  such  errors  will  be  gratefully 
received. 


CONTENTS 


INTRODUCTION 

PAGE 

The  History  of  Music  in  General 17 

PART  I.  UNCIVILIZED  AND  ANCIENT  MUSIC 

CHAPTER 

I.  Primitive  or  Savage  Music 25 

II.  Semi-Civilized  Music 32 

III.  Greek  and  Roman  Music 50 

PART  II.  MEDIAEVAL  MUSIC 

IV.  The  Rise  of  Christian  Music 63 

V.  Polyphony  and  Secular  Song 77 

VI.  The  Fifteenth  Century 93 

PART  III.  THE  SIXTEENTH  CENTURY 

VII.  The  Venetian  and  Roman  Schools 111 

VIII.  Church  Music  in  Northern  and  Western  Europe  . . 128 

IX.  Secular  Music.  Instruments.  Theory  ....  147 

PART  IV.  THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 

X.  The  Early  Musical  Drama 165 

XI.  The  Expansion  of  Dramatic  Music 180 

XII.  Progress  in  Church  Music 194 

XIII.  The  Organ  Style 214 

XIV.  The  Violin.  Musical  Literature 229 

PART  V.  THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 

XV.  Church  Music  in  Bach’s  Time 249 

XVI.  The  Culmination  of  the  Early  Italian  Opera  . . 273 


9 


10 


CONTENTS 


CHAPTER 

XVII.  Instruments  and  Instrumentalists  .... 
XVIII.  Forms  of  Composition.  Theory.  Literature  . 

PART  VI.  THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 

XIX.  Haydn.  The  Sonata  and  the  Orchestra  . 

XX.  Gluck  and  the  Dramatic  Reform  .... 

XXI.  Mozart  and  the  Exaltation  of  Melody  . 

XXII.  The  Rise  of  Pianism.  Sacred  Music  .... 
XXIII.  Theoretical  and  Literary  Progress  .... 


PART  VII.  THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


XXIV.  The  Advent  of  Beethoven  . 


XXV.  The  Romantic  Opera  and  the  Song 

XXVI.  Italian  and  French  Opera  . 

XXVII.  Instrumental  Virtuosity 
XXVIII.  Church  and  Organ  Music 
XXIX.  Growth  of  Musical  Literature  . 


PART  VIII.  THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH 
CENTURY 


XXX. 

XXXI. 

XXXII. 

XXXIII. 

XXXIV. 

XXXV. 

XXXVI. 

XXXVII. 


Schumann  and  Romanticism 

Mendelssohn  and  the  Leipsic  Circle  . 

New  Lights  upon  Pianism 

The  Opera  aside  from  Wagner  .... 
Wagner  and  the  Reconstruction  of  the  Opera 
Symphonists  and  Instrumentalists 
Choral  Music.  The  Song.  The  English  School 
Musical  Education  and  Literature  . 


CONCLUSION 

Brief  Sketch  of  the  Later  Nineteenth  Century 


Index  of  Subjects  and  Places 
Index  of  Persons 


PAGE 

29  7 
315 


335 

355 

37i 

385 

400 


411 

424 

438 

457 

479 

49° 


501 

5i5 

529 

546 

562 

580 

599 

617 


635 

657 

664 


ILLUSTRATIONS 


The  Organ  at  Haarlem 


Frontispiece 


FIGURE 

1.  Alaskan  Stone  Flute 

2.  Arab  Pan’s-Pipe  or  Syrinx 

3.  African  Zanzes  ... 

4.  Miscellaneous  Drums 

5.  African  Marimba  .... 

6.  Primitive  Harps  and  Zithers  . 

7.  Chinese  Pipas  or  Japanese  Biwas  . 

8.  Chinese  Moon-Guitar  or  Yue-kin 

9.  Chinese  Ur-heen  or  Japanese  Kokiu 

10.  Japanese  Samisen  .... 

11.  Chinese  Temple  Gong  . 

12.  Chinese  Cheng  and  Japanese  Sho  . 

13.  Japanese  Kotos  .... 

14.  Hindu  Vina 

15.  Hindu  Sitars  ..... 

16.  Hindu  Sarindas  or  Sarungis  . 

17.  Hindu  Sarungi  .... 

18.  Burmese  Soung  .... 

19.  Javanese  Anklong  .... 

20.  Burmese  or  Javanese  Gong-Piano  . 

21.  Burmese  or  Siamese  Crocodile  Harp 

22.  Chinese  and  Siamese  Ranats  . 

23.  Arab  Kemangehs  .... 

24.  Arab  Kissars  or  Lyres  . 

25.  Arab  Kanoon  or  Zither  . 

26.  Persian  Guitar  .... 

27.  Arab  Rebabs  . . . . . 

28.  Persian  Santir  or  Dulcimer 

29.  Persian  Guitar  or  Lute  . 

30.  Persian  Antelope  Harps  . 

31.  Egyptian  Shoulder  Harp  or  Buni  . 

32.  Egyptian  Harp  and  Harpist  . 

33-  Egyptian  Harp  or  Buni  . 


PAGE 

. 28 

. 28 

. 28 

. 28 

. 28 

• 30 

• 34 

• 34 

• 34 

• 34 

• 35 

• 35 

• 36 

• 38 

• 38 

• 38 

• 39 

• 39 

. 40 

. 40 

. 40 

. 4r 

42 
. 42 

. 42 

• 43 

. 44 

• 44 

• 44 

. 44 

. 48 

. 48 

. 48 


1 


2 


ILLUSTRATIONS 


FIGURE  PAGE 


34. 

Egyptian  Lute  or  Nofre 

. 

48 

35* 

Egyptian  Harp  and  Harpist  . 

48 

36. 

Greek  Lyre  or  Kithara  . 

54 

37- 

Greek  Lyre  or  Kithara  . 

54 

38. 

Greek  Hydraulus  or  Water- Organ  . 

54 

39- 

Fragment  of  the  Hymn  to  Apollo  . 

57 

40. 

Greek  Lyre  or  Kithara  and  Kitharist 

60 

41. 

The  Guidonian  Hand 

69 

42. 

Neumes,  10-uth  century 

70 

43- 

Neumes,  nth  century 

70 

44. 

Neumes,  13th  century 

70 

45- 

Neumes,  14th  century 

70 

46. 

Neumes,  14th  century 

70 

47- 

The  Genesis  of  Clefs 

72 

48. 

Ancient  Irish  Harp 

74 

49. 

Ancient  Rotte  or  Lyre  . 

74 

50. 

Welsh  Crwth  or  Viol 

74 

51- 

Modern  Hurdy-Gurdy 

74 

52‘ 

Nun’s-Fiddle  or  Trumscheit  . 

10  7 

53- 

Lute-Tablature  .... 

108 

54- 

Italian  Lute  ..... 

153 

55- 

Theorbo 

154 

56. 

Arch-Lute 

*54 

57- 

Bass-Lute  or  Chitarrone 

154 

58. 

German  Positive  Organ  . 

213 

59- 

Italian  Clavichord  .... 

216 

60. 

German  Regal  .... 

216 

61. 

Italian  Virginal  .... 

216 

62. 

Italian  Portative  Organ  . 

216 

63- 

Moroccan  Kouitara  or  Lute 

230 

64. 

Old  French  Rebec  ... 

230 

65. 

Russian  Balalaika  or  Guitar 

230 

66. 

German  Zithers  .... 

230 

6 7- 

Milanese  and  Neapolitan  Mandolins 

232 

68. 

Cittern  or  ‘ English  Guitar 1 . 

232 

69. 

Italian  Guitars  .... 

232 

70. 

Details  of  Violin-Construction 

234 

7i- 

Details  of  Violin-Construction 

234 

72. 

Details  of  Violin-Construction 

234 

73* 

Stradivari  Violin  .... 

234 

74- 

Stradivari  Violin  .... 

234 

75- 

Viola  da  Gamba  and  Alto  Viol 

236 

76. 

Viola  d1  Amore  .... 

236 

77- 

Pochettes 

236 

ILLUSTRATIONS 


3 


FIGURE 

78.  Recorders  or  Flutes  Douces  . 

79.  Recorders  and  Flutes  a Bee  . 

80.  Flutes  and  Piccolo 

81.  Serpent 

82.  German  Clavichord 

83.  Italian  Harpsichord 

84.  Clavichord  and  Harpsichord  Actions 

85.  Cristofori  Pianoforte 

86.  Cristofori  Pianoforte 

87.  Baryton  (large  Viola  d1  Amore)  . 

88.  Cors  Anglais  or  ‘English  Horns’  . 

89.  Oboes 

90.  Bassoons  .... 

91.  Clarinets 

92.  Basset-horns  .... 

93.  Viola  da  gamba  .... 

94.  ‘French 1 Horns  .... 

95.  Trombone  ..... 

96.  Bows  for  Viols  ... 

97.  Cristofori  Piano- Action 

98.  Viennese  Piano-Action 

99.  English  Piano-Action  . 

100.  Glass  Harmonica  .... 

101.  Modern  Piano- Actions  . 

102.  Modern  Piano-Frame  . 

103.  Saxophones  

104.  Keyed  or  Kent  Bugle  . 

105.  Ophicleide  ..... 

106.  Sax-Horns 

107.  Modern  Harp  .... 

108.  Guitars  ..... 

109.  Sarrusophones  .... 
no.  German  Cabinet  Organ 


298 

298 

298 

3°° 

308 

308 

308 

3IQ 

310 

339 

342 

342 

342 

344 

344 

346 

346 

347 
354 
386 
386 
386 
386 
472 
472 

475 

476 
476 

476 

477 

478 
596 
607 


The  originals  from  which  Figs.  1-16,  18,  20-30,  49-52,  54-57,  65-69,  77,  79-81,  88-96,  ros- 
ier, 108-109  are  taken  are  in  the  Stearns  Collection  at  the  University  of  Michigan,  Ann 
Arbor;  and  those  from  which  Figs.  17,  19,  31,  33-34,  36-37,  40,  48,  58-64,  70-72,  75-76,  78, 
82-87,  97-101,  no  are  taken  are  in  the  Crosby-Brown  Collection  at  the  Metropolitan 
Museum  of  Art,  New  York.  The  remaining  illustrations  are  from  photographs  or  engrav- 
ings variously  secured. 

The  instruments  were  drawn  by  Charles  K.  Stevens,  and  the  portraits  by  Otto 
Schneider,  both  of  New  York. 


14 


PORTRAITS  — MAPS 


PORTRAITS 


PAGE 


Palestrina 

. 125 

Purcell 

. 190 

Schiitz 

. 205 

J.  S.  Bach 

• 253 

A.  Scarlatti 

. 279 

Handel  . 

. 290 

Haydn 

• 337 

Gluck 

• 361 

Mozart 

• 372 

Beethoven 

. 415 

Weber 

PAGE 

. 425 

Schubert  . 

• 433 

Schumann 

. 505 

Mendelssohn  . 

• 517 

Chopin 

• 531 

Verdi 

• 547 

Wagner  . 

. 564 

Liszt 

• 575 

Brahms  . 

. 592 

MAPS 

TO  FACE  PAGE 

I.  France,  the  Low  Countries  and  England 93 

II.  Italy,  Austria  and  South  Germany 163 

III.  Germany  and  Austria 408 


INTRODUCTION 


INTRODUCTION 


HISTORY  OF  MUSIC  IN  GENERAL 


1 . The  Field  of  the  History  of  Music. 

2.  Its  Value. 

3.  Its  Natural  Divisions. 

4.  Its  Sources  and  Authorities. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  MUSIC 


INTRODUCTION 

THE  HISTORY  OF  MUSIC  IN  GENERAL 

1.  The  Field  of  the  History  of  Music. — The  history  of  music 
is  one  department  of  the  general  history  of  human  culture, 
more  particularly  of  the  history  of  the  fine  arts  as  special 
embodiments  and  instruments  of  that  culture.  Its  field  is 
extensive,  including  all  ascertainable  facts  regarding  musical 
efforts  wherever  found,  from  the  earliest  times  to  the  present, 
and  ranging  from  the  childish  attempts  of  the  savage  to  the 
monumental  achievements  of  the  greatest  civilized  artists.  Its 
general  object  being  to  present  these  facts  in  their  relations  as 
features  of  a development  that  has  been  governed  by  large 
principles  or  tendencies,  its  main  topics  may  be  roughly  tabu- 
lated as  follows : — 

(1)  Rudimentary  experiments  by  savage  or  uncivilized  peoples  in  vari- 

ous parts  of  the  world, 

(2)  The  organized  and  reasoned  systems  of  the  dominant  races  and 

countries  of  history, 

(3)  The  growth  of  a positive  science  of  composition,  with  the  theories 

and  rules  by  which  it  has  been  governed, 

(4)  The  evolution  of  those  specific  types  or  forms  of  composition  that 

have  most  affected  progress  as  a whole, 

(5)  The  origin  and  development  of  musical  instruments  and  implements, 

including  notations, 

(6)  The  advance  of  vocal  and  instrumental  performance  as  an  artistic 

specialty, 

(7)  The  lives,  works  and  styles  of  composers  and  performers,  especially 

those  that  are  typical  or  influential, 

(8)  The  literary  or  scholarly  treatment  of  musical  subjects  in  books 

and  periodicals, 

(9)  The  educational  or  commercial  enterprises  devoted  to  the  mainte- 

nance or  expansion  of  the  art,  including  schools,  societies,  publish- 
ing houses,  manufactories,  etc. 

17 


c 


i8 


INTRODUCTION 


While  the  ideal  scope  of  the  subject  is  thus  wide,  the  field  of 
a particular  written  history  is  at  once  less  and  more.  It  is  less, 
because  it  is  utterly  impossible  to  compress  into  a single  book 
all  the  facts.  It  is  more,  because  the  practical  historian  must  be 
something  of  a critic  as  he  works,  selecting  certain  groups  of 
facts  for  emphasis,  classifying  them  under  logical  heads,  and 
seeking  at  every  point  to  keep  what  he  conceives  to  be  of 
special  importance  in  the  foreground. 

2.  Its  Value.  — Historical  study  has  often  been  neglected  by 
practical  musicians  because  its  literary  or  scholastic  character 
seems  so  different  from  the  artistic  efforts  upon  which  they  are 
engaged.  The  history  of  music  has  been  much  overlooked  by 
general  historical  students,  partly  because  of  a curious  disdain 
of  the  fine  arts  as  essential  parts  of  culture,  and  partly  because 
of  the  lack,  until  recently,  of  adequate  handbooks.  Now,  how- 
ever, since  music-history  is  fully  established  as  a branch  of 
critical  investigation,  such  neglect  by  musicians  or  others  is 
inexcusable.  Its  obvious  utilities  lie  in  a general  broadening 
of  thought  about  musical  art,  in  disclosing  dominant  lines  of 
progress  and  effort,  in  exhibiting  the  personality  and  genius 
of  creative  artists  and  leaders,  in  providing  rational  grounds  for 
appreciation,  criticism  and  practical  procedure,  and  in  showing 
how  musical  life  has  been  interlocked  with  literature  and  the 
other  fine  arts  and  with  the  advance  of  social  life  in  general. 
For  these  reasons,  music-history  appeals  not  only  to  the  musi- 
cian, but  to  all  cultivated  persons. 

3.  Its  Natural  Divisions.  — Music-history  divides  into  two 
great  sections,  of  which  the  first  deals  with  a variety  of  peoples 
that  lie  outside  the  present  circle  of  civilized  nations  and  whose 
musical  activity  has  not  affected  the  latter,  while  the  second  con- 
cerns the  greater  historic  peoples  from  classical  times  until  the 
present.  The  first  section  is  much  the  less  important,  and  can 
be  treated  only  in  a summary,  descriptive  way.  The  second 
presents  a clear  continuity  and  an  organic  development.  The 
natural  subdivisions  are  as  follows  : — 

A.  Uncivilized  Music 

I.  Primitive  — among  races  that  have  not  reached  the  point  of  artistic 
organization.  Although  music  of  this  sort  has  always  existed,  we 
know  it  only  as  it  has  been  recently  examined. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  MUSIC  IN  GENERAL 


19 


II.  Semi-civilized  — including  two  distinct  groups  : 

(1)  Peoples  now  existing,  like  the  Chinese,  Hindus,  etc.,  whose  music 

has  a real  system,  but  without  relation  to  our  own ; 

(2)  Ancietit  peoples , like  the  Egyptians,  Assyrians  and  Hebrews, 

who  seem  to  have  been  on  a similar  footing  with  the  above. 
This  group  shades  off  into  the  next,  though  the  connection  is 
not  clear. 


B.  Civilized  Music 

III.  Greek  and  Roman  — including  whatever  was  the  direct  basis  of  the 

Early  Christian  and  Mediaeval  development.  The  end  of  this 
period  may  be  variously  fixed,  300  a.d.  being  a convenient  date. 
The  countries  affected  all  lie  about  the  Mediterranean. 

IV.  Mediaeval  — with  four  subdivisions: 

(1)  The  Plain-Song  Period,  when  ritual  music  was  gradually  per- 

fected and  diffused  through  Europe — to  the  12th  century; 

(2)  The  Rise  of  True  Composition , both  sacred  and  secular,  includ- 

ing the  first  contrapuntists  on  the  one  side  and  the  Trouba- 
dours and  Minnesinger  on  the  other; 

(3)  The  Netherland  Counterpoint  of  the  15th  century; 

(4)  The  Sixteenth  Ce7itury  as  the  culminating  period  of  mediaeval 

progress  and  the  time  of  transition  to  modern  styles.  Most 
of  Europe  is  now  affected  except  the  most  northern  countries. 

V.  Modern  — including  stages  that  may  well  be  marked  by  centuries  : 

(1)  The  Seventeetith  Century,  including  the  rise  of  the  Opera  and  of 

Instrumental  Music  as  specialties  ; 

(2)  The  Eighteenth  Century,  with  ( a ) the  culmination  of  previous 

progress  in  the  first  half,  and  ( b ) the  appearance  in  the  second 
of  the  Sonata  and  Symphony  and  the  modern  Orchestra,  with 
new  ideas  also  about  the  Opera  and  the  Song ; 

(3)  The  Nineteenth  Century — by  far  the  most  complex  and  pro- 

ductive of  all  — divisible  into  three  main  periods,  including 
(a)  the  culmination  of  classical  methods,  ( b ) the  efflorescence 
of  romantic  enthusiasm,  and  (c)  the  recent  expansion  of  ideas 
and  forms  in  manifold  further  ways. 

4.  Its  Sources  and  Authorities.  — So  far  as  the  facts  of  music 
can  be  directly  observed,  as  by  watching  the  actual  work  of 
composers  or  by  hearing  adequate  performances  of  representa- 
tive compositions,  the  data  of  its  history  can  be  studied  at  first 
hand.  But  since  this  original  investigation  is  possible  only  to 
a limited  extent,  recourse  must  be  had  to  rescripts  of  music  in 
written  or  printed  form,  to  standard  summaries  in  which  the 
facts  are  set  down  and  discussed,  such  as  histories,  cyclopaedias, 
biographies  and  technical  monographs,  and  to  the  opinions  of 
trustworthy  critics,  however  expressed. 


20 


INTRODUCTION 


The  scientific  cultivation  of  music-history  and  the  vigorous 
development  of  its  literature  are  of  rather  recent  date.  Some 
histories  began  to  appear  before  1800  and  much  detached  work 
on  special  topics  was  undertaken,  but  all  the  comprehensive 
treatises  belong  to  the  19th  century,  especially  to  its  latter  half. 
In  fullness  of  research  and  in  scholarly  method  of  presenta- 
tion many  of  these  are  fully  abreast  of  works  in  other  fields 
of  historical  study. 

For  convenience  of  reference,  a condensed  summary  of  the  general 
histories  and  cyclopaedias  is  here  inserted. 

Histories.  — Without  reckoning  the  innumerable  monographs  on  par- 
ticular periods  and  topics,  at  least  125  somewhat  comprehensive  Histories 
of  Music  may  be  named.  The  pioneers  were,  in  German,  Prbitz 
(1690)  ; in  Italian,  Bontempi  (1695)  ; in  French,  the  brothers  Bon- 
net, using  materials  gathered  by  Bour delot  (1715)  ; and  in  English, 
Roger  North  (c.  1728,  but  not  published  till  1846). 

Of  the  older  books  about  30  were  prior  to  1850,  those  of  the  most 
importance  being  by  G.  Martini,  3 vols.,  1757-81  ; J.  Hawkins , 5 vols., 
1776  (revised  in  2 vols.,  1853-75)  ; C.  Burney,  4 vols.,  1776-89;  J.N. 
Forkel,  2 vols.,  1788-1801 ; R.  G.  Kiesewetter,  1834  (2d  ed.  1846,  Eng. 
trans.  1848)  ; A.L.  de  Lafage,  2 vols.,  1844  (unfinished). 

Of  the  many  works  since  1850  some  are  based  upon  original  research 
and  aim  at  scientific  thoroughness,  while  others  are  concise  and  popular. 
Several  examples  of  the  latter  are  here  included  : — F.  Brendel , Gesch.  d. 
Musik  in  Italien,  Deutschland  u.  Frankreich,  2 vols.,  1852  (7th  ed. 
1888,636  pp.);  A.  IV.  Ambros,  Gesch.  d.  Musik,  5 vols.,  1862-82 
(3d  ed.  extensively  revised,  1887-93  ; also  continuation  by  Langhans , be- 
low) ; A.Reissmann,  Allgem.  Gesch.  d.  Musik,  3 vols.,  1863-5;  A. 
vonDommer,  Handbuch  d.  Musikgesch.,  1867  (2d  ed.  1878,  625  pp.)  ; 
F.J.Fetis,  Hist.  gen.  de  la  musique,  5 vols.,  1869-75;  E.  Naumann, 
Die  Tonkunst  in  d.  Culturgesch.,  2 vols.,  1869-70;  Paul  Frank, 
Gesch.  d.  Tonkunst,  1863  (3d  ed.  1878,  219  pp.)  ; B.Kothe , Abriss 
d.  Musikgesch.,  1874  (7th  ed.  1904,  351  pp.)  ; Heinrich  Kostlin , Gesch. 
d.  Musik  im  Umriss,  1875  (5th  ed.  1899, 636  pp.)  ; Robert  Mtisiol, 
Katechismus  d.  Musikgesch.,  1877  (3d  ed.  1905, 412  pp.)  ; Wilhelm 
Langhans,  Musikgesch.  — 12  Vorlesungen,  1878  (2d  ed.  1879,  215  pp., 
Eng.  trans.  1886,184  pp.);  E.  Naumann,  Illustrirte  Musikgesch.,  2 
vols.,  1880-5  (Eng.  trans.  n.d.)  ; Laure  Collin,  Hist,  abregee  de  la 
musique,  1881  (7th  ed.  1891,364  pp.);  IV.  Langhans,  Gesch.  d.  Musik 
d.  17.,  18.  u.  19.  Jahrhunderts  (continuing  A mbros),  2 vols.,  1882-6; 
F.  Clement,  Hist,  de  la  musique,  1885,  819  pp. ; J.  F.  Rowbotham, 
Hist,  of  Music,  3 vols.,  1885-7  (abridged,  1893,  419  pp.)  ; W.  S.  Rock- 
stro,  Gen.  Hist,  of  Music,  1886,  535  pp. ; H.Riemann , Katechismus 
d.  Musikgesch.,  2 parts,  1888-9  (3d  ed.  1906,  Eng.  trans.  n.d.) ; J.C. 
Fillmore,  Lessons  in  Music  Hist.,  1888,  215  pp. ; W.S.B  Mathews, 
Pop.  Hist,  of  the  Art  of  Music,  1889,  534  pp. ; J.  E.  Matthew,  Manual 


THE  HISTORY  OF  MUSIC  IN  GENERAL 


21 


of  Musical  Hist.,  1892  (2d  ed.  1893,436  pp.)  ; Adalbert  Swoboda , Illus- 
trate Musikgesch  , 2 vols.,  1892-4;  C.H.H.  Parry,  The  Art  of 
Music,  1893  (4th  ed.  1905,  342  pp.)  ; Alfredo  Untersteiner,  Storia  della 
musica,  1893  (2d  ed.  1902,  330  pp.,  Eng.  trans.  1902,  349  pp.)  ; Henri 
Lavoix,  Hist,  de  la  musique,  1896,  368  pp. ; W.J.  Henderson,  How 
Music  Developed,  1899,  413  pp. ; Adolf  Prosniz,  Compendium  d. 
Musikgesch.,  2 vols.,  1900  (2d  ed.  1901-  );  M.  Vogel,  Gesch.  d.  Musik, 
1900*  218  pp. ; The  Oxford  Hist,  of  Music:  — H.  E.  Wooldridge, 
The  Polyphonic  Period,  2 vols.,  1901-5,  C.  H.  H.  Parry,  17th  Cen- 
tury, 1902,  f.  A.  F.  Maitland , Age  of  Bach  and  Handel,  1902,  W. 
H.  Hadow,  Viennese  Period,  1904,  Edward  Dannreuther , Romantic 
Period,  1905 ; Hermann  Ritter,  Allgem.  illustrirte  Encyclopadie  d. 
Musikgesch.,  6 vols.,  1902;  H.  Riemann , Handbuch  d.  Musikgesch., 
2 vols.,  1904-  ; Otto  Keller,  Illustrirte  Gesch.  d.  Musik,  1894  (2d  ed. 
1903,  2 vols.)  ; Karl  Storck,  Gesch.  d.  Musik,  1904,  848  pp. ; Edward 
Dickinson,  Study  of  the  Hist,  of  Music,  1905,  409  pp. ; W.  f.  Baltzell 
(editor),  Hist,  of  Music,  1905,  564  pp. ; J.  K.  Paine,  Hist,  of  Music  to 
the  Death  of  Schubert,  1907,  314  pp. ; C.  G.  Hamilton , Outlines  of  Music 
Hist.,  1908,  292  pp. 

Dictionaries.  — The  pioneers  here  were  ( a ) Terms  only — Tinctoris 
(1474),  Ducange  (1678),  Janowka  (1701),  and  Brossard  (1703); 
(b)  Biographies  only  — E.  L.  Gerber  (1790-2);  (c)  Both  terms  and 

biographies — J.  G.  Walt  her  (1732)  and/.  J.  Rousseau  (1767). 

Of  the  many  works  of  this  class  it  is  enough  to  name  the  larger  or  most 
recent,  such  as  G.  Schilling,  Universallexikon  d.  Tonkunst,  6 vols.,  1835-8 
(2d  ed.  1840-2)  ; F.J.  Fctis,  Biographie  universelle  des  musiciens,  8 vols., 
1835-44  (2ded.  1860-5,  with  Supplement  by  Pougin , 2 vols.,  1879-81)  ; E. 
Bernsdorf  Neues  Universallexikon  d.  Tonkunst,  3 vols  , 1856-61  (Nach- 
trag,  1865)  ; H.  Mendel  and  A.Reissmann,  Musikal.  Conversations- 
Lexikon,  12  vols.,  1870-83;  O.  Paid,  Handlexikon  d.  Tonkunst,  2 vols., 
1 873  ; J.  Stainer  and  W.  A.  Barrett , Diet,  of  Musical  Terms,  1876  (latest 
ed.  1898,  464  pp.)  ; George  Grove,  Diet,  of  Music  and  Musicians,  4 vols. 
and  Index,  1879-90  (2d  ed.  5 vols,  1904-  );  H.  Riemann,  Musik- 
Lexikon,  1882,  6th  ed.  1905,  (1508  pp  , Eng.  trans.  1893-6,  895  pp.)  ; 
J.  D.  Champlin  and  W.  E.  Afthorp , Cyclopedia  of  Music  and  Musi- 
cians, 3 vols.,  1890;  Theodore  Baker,  Biographical  Diet,  of  Musicians, 
1900  (2d  ed.  1905,695  pp  ) ; R.Eitner , Biographisch-bibliographisches 
Quellen-Lexikon,  10  vols.,  1900-4. 


PART  I 


UNCIVILIZED  AND  ANCIENT  MUSIC 


PART  I 

UNCIVILIZED  AND  ANCIENT  MUSIC 

Chap.  I.  Primitive  or  Savage  Music. 

5.  In  General. 

6.  As  a Social  Institution. 

7.  Its  Technical  Features. 

8.  Instruments. 

9.  The  Origin  of  Music. 

Chap.  II.  Semi-Civilized  Music. 

10.  In  General. 

11.  China. 

12.  India. 

13.  The  Mohammedans. 

14.  Babylonia  and  Assyria. 

15.  Israel. 

16.  Egypt. 

Chap.  III.  Greek  and  Roman  Music. 

17.  In  General. 

18.  Union  of  Music  with  Poetry. 

19.  Actual  Effects. 

20.  Acoustical  and  Theoretical  Research. 

21.  Notation. 

22.  Roman  Music. 

23.  Literature  about  Music. 


24 


CHAPTER  I 


PRIMITIVE  OR  SAVAGE  MUSIC 

5.  In  General. — Some  form  of  music  is  found  in  every  part  of 
the  uncivilized  world,  from  the  islands  of  the  southern  Pacific 
round  to  the  Americas,  and  from  the  equatorial  zone  far  toward 
the  poles.  This  extensive  diffusion  points  to  a spontaneous  use 
by  all  races  of  song,  dance  and  instrument  as  means  of  expres- 
sion, amusement  and  even  discipline.  The  primary  impulse  to 
music  seems  to  belong  to  mankind  as  a whole. 

Although  most  savage  music  is  crude  and  to  us  disagreeable, 
yet  its  interest  for  the  student  is  considerable.  By  noting  how 
it  arises,  how  it  is  used,  and  with  what  it  is  associated,  we  gain 
insight  into  the  essence  and  relations  of  the  musical  impulse. 
The  widespread  combination  of  song  with  dancing,  mimicry 
and  poetry,  as  well  as  with  religious  exercises,  challenges  at- 
tention. The  painstaking  care  in  fashioning  instruments  is 
impressive  and  instructive.  The  naive  experiments  in  scale- 
making suggest  the  probable  sources  of  modern  theory.  The 
analogies  between  the  musical  efforts  of  primitive  adults  and 
those  of  civilized  children  have  a bearing  upon  current  ped- 
agogy.  For  the  critical  student  of  either  history  or  aesthetics, 
therefore,  the  facts  of  savage  music  are  valuable. 

The  great  difficulty  of  the  topic  lies  in  the  variable  accuracy  and 
clearness  of  the  first-hand  reports  of  the  facts  that  come  from  travelers, 
missionaries  and  other  observers. 

6.  As  a Social  Institution.  — In  primitive  conditions  music  is 
first  of  all  a social  diversion  or  play,  affording  an  outlet  for 
surplus  animal  spirit,  stimulating  emotional  excitement,  and 
helping  to  maintain  muscular  and  nervous  energy.  Singing 
and  dancing  are  always  conspicuously  social  — a centre  of 
interest  for  perhaps  a whole  village  or  tribe.  The  craving  for 
popular  activity  in  these  ways  often  leads  to  stated  gatherings 
of  a festal  character,  the  ceremonies  usually  being  specifically 
associated  with  an  occupation  or  event,  as  with  hunting,  agricul- 
ture, worship  or  war,  or  with  birth,  sickness  or  death.  The 


25 


2 6 


PRIMITIVE  MUSIC 


psychical  reactions  of  motions  in  rhythm  and  of  tones  are  far 
more  striking  than  among  civilized  peoples,  and  are  sought  both 
for  their  effect  on  the  individual  performer  or  percipient  and  for 
their  mesmeric  control  of  the  crowd. 

The  practice  of  music  is  sometimes  shared  by  men  and  women  alike, 
but  sometimes,  for  obscure  reasons,  is  reserved  to  one  or  the  other  sex 
exclusively.  Sometimes  there  is  a musical  class  or  guild  that  superin- 
tends musical  exercises  and  maintains  traditions.  Often  music  is  held 
to  be  more  or  less  of  a superhuman  mystery  — a notion  duly  utilized  by 
the  priest  and  the  necromancer. 

Among  savage  peoples  music  seldom  appears  as  an  indepen- 
dent art.  Its  association  with  dancing  is  so  close  that  the  two 
are  really  twin  activities.  Rhythmic  motions  with  some  re- 
current noise,  like  hand-clapping  or  the  striking  of  sticks,  pass 
over  readily  into  a rude  chant  or  singsong,  perhaps  aided  by 
some  instrumental  accessory.  Conversely,  the  rhythm  of  sing- 
ing tends  to  induce  bodily  motions.  Rhythm  thus  inevitably 
brings  dancing  and  song  together. 

Again,  since  speaking  and  singing  are  both  vocal  processes, 
they  tend  to  react  upon  each  other.  All  primitive  speech  that 
is  highly  emotional  or  meant  to  be  specially  impressive  is  cast 
in  forms  of  poetry.  To  conceive  such  utterance  with  reference 
to  singing,  and  actually  to  chant  it,  seems  instinctive.  Where 
there  is  a guild  of  tribal  minstrels,  they  are  expected  to 
provide  odes  or  ballads  of  various  sorts — heroic,  martial, 
mythical,  fanciful  or  humorous.  In  form  such  odes  are 
usually  rhythmic,  but  true  recitative  or  cantillation  is  not  un- 
common. 

In  some  cases  the  text  has  an  evident  charm  or  pathos,  but  in  others  it 
seems  devoid  of  sense  or  sentiment.  Instances  occur  of  the  use  of  mere 
nonsense-jingles  and  of  even  a song-jargon,  quite  distinct  from  ordinary 
speech  — thus  testifying  to  an  interest  in  the  rhythmic  or  tonal  effect 
apart  from  the  thought. 

Finally,  since  mimicry  or  pantomime  is  instinctively  sought 
by  all  races,  dancing  and  song  readily  assume  a dramatic  char- 
acter, involving  personification,  plot  and  action.  The  story  may 
be  serious  or  comic,  exciting  or  diverting,  strenuous  or  ener- 
vating, but,  whatever  its  character,  the  effect  is  likely  to  be 
heightened  by  musical  or  orchestral  treatment.  Religious  exer- 
cises are  frequently  cast  in  the  form  of  such  song-pantomimes. 


PRIMITIVE  SCALES 


2 7 


Indeed,  it  seems  as  if  primitive  religion  felt  itself  forced  to  adopt 
musico-dramatic  modes  of  expression. 

7.  Its  Technical  Features.  — All  savage  music  is  conspicuously 
accentual.  Usually  the  accents  fall  into  definite  rhythms,  duple 
varieties  being  commoner  than  triple.  The  basal  rhythm  is 
made  emphatic  by  bodily  motions,  noises  or  vocal  cries.  The 
metric  patterns  (schemes  of  long  and  short  tones)  and  the  larger 
phrase-schemes  are  often  curiously  intricate,  puzzling  even  the 
trained  observer. 

In  accompanied  songs  there  are  instances  of  duple  patterns  in  the 
voice  against  triple  ones  in  the  accompaniment. 

The  vocal  decoration  of  rhythms  leads  directly  to  melodic 
figures,  though  the  latter  doubtless  also  result  from  experiments 
with  instruments.  As  a rule,  a given  melody  contains  but  few 
distinct  tones,  though  sometimes  varied  with  indescribable  slides 
or  howls.  One  or  two  tone-figures  are  usually  repeated  again 
and  again.  Generally  a rudimentary  notion  of  a scale  (or  system 
of  tones)  is  suggested,  though  no  one  type  of  scale  is  universal. 
Scales  and  the  melodies  made  from  them  are  more  often  con- 
ceived downward  than  upward  (as  is  our  habit).  Whether  a 
true  keynote  is  recognized  is  often  doubtful,  the  whole  intona- 
tion being  vague  and  fluctuating.  The  total  effect  is  generally 
minor,  though  major  intervals  and  groups  of  tones  are  not 
unusual. 

On  the  one  hand,  cases  occur  in  which  short  intervals,  like  the  semi- 
tone, are  avoided,  yielding  melodies  that  imply  a pentatonic  system,  and 
these  are  common  enough  to  lead  many  to  urge  that  the  essentially  primi- 
tive scale  is  pentatonic.  But,  on  the  other,  what  we  call  chromatic 
scales  are  also  found,  utilizing  even  smaller  intervals  than  the  semitone. 
Scales  approximating  our  diatonic  type  are  also  reported,  implying  a fair 
sense  of  tone-relationship. 

Just  what  stimulates  the  invention  of  melodies  and  controls  their  de- 
velopment is  uncertain.  In  some  cases  the  habit  of  improvisation  seems 
influential ; in  others,  ingenuity  with  instruments.  A form  of  melody, 
once  established,  is  apt  to  be  tenaciously  preserved. 

It  has  been  thought  that  ideas  of  harmony  or  part-singing  are 
impossible  for  the  savage  mind.  But  it  appears  that  some 
tribes  in  Africa  and  Australia  do  sing  in  parts  and  even  attempt 
concerted  effects  between  voices  and  instruments.  Such  com- 
binations, however,  are  rare  and  do  not  show  any  real  system. 


2 8 


PRIMITIVE  MUSIC 


Fig.  5. 

FIG.  1.  — Alaskan  Stone  Flute  — design  like  a totem-pole.  FIG.  2.  — Arab  Pan’s-Pipes 
or  Syrinx.  Fig.  3.  — African  Zanzes  — iron  or  bamboo  tongues  mounted  on  a resonance- 
box,  played  by  twanging.  Fig.  4.  — Miscellaneous  Drums  — primitive,  Egyptian,  1 urkish, 
Japanese,  etc.,  one  (Thibetan)  made  of  a skull  cut  in  two.  FIG.  5.  — African  Marimba 
or  Xylophone. 


PRIMITIVE  INSTRUMENTS 


29 


8.  Instruments.  — This  branch  of  the  topic  is  made  specially 
clear  and  interesting  by  the  existence  of  many  actual  specimens 
in  all  large  ethnological  museums.  Yet  a systematic  summary 
of  the  facts  in  any  brief  form  is  impossible,  since  the  details 
vary  indefinitely. 

Extraordinary  cleverness  and  genuine  artistic  feeling  are  often 
displayed  in  fashioning  musical  implements  by  peoples  other- 
wise very  rude.  Great  patience  and  dexterity  are  expended 
in  working  such  materials  as  are  available  into  the  desired 
condition  and  form,  and  elaborate  carving  or  tasteful  coloring 
is  often  added.  Well-made  instruments  are  held  to  be  precious, 
sometimes  sacred. 

The  following  summary  is  designed  simply  to  give  a hint  of  the  indefi- 
nite variety  of  forms  under  three  standard  classes  : — 

Flatile  or  wind  instruments.  — The  different  flutes  and  flageolets 
found  are  innumerable.  They  are  made  from  reeds,  grasses,  wood,  bone 
(even  human  bones),  clay,  stone.  They  are  blown  across  a mouth-hole 
or  through  a whistle-mouthpiece,  and  either  by  the  mouth  or  by  the 
nose.  They  are  both  single  and  double,  or,  in  the  case  of  syrinxes  or 
Pan’s-pipes,  compound.  Often  they  are  fitted  with  from  two  to  several 
finger-holes  for  varying  the  pitch,  though,  curiously,  all  these  are  not 
always  habitually  used.  Occasionally  a reservoir  for  the  air  is  provided, 
such  as  a flexible  bag  or  sack,  with  the  pipe  or  pipes  attached.  The 
tones  vary  greatly  in  power  and  sweetness,  though  the  tendency  is  toward 
shrill  and  piercing  qualities. 

Horns  and  trumpets  are  also  common,  of  every  shape,  size  and  quality, 
made  of  horn,  shell,  ivory,  bamboo,  wood,  metal.  Generally  there  is 
little  variation  of  pitch,  though  overtones  are  used  somewhat.  The  tones 
produced  are  usually  powerful,  often  harsh. 

Percussive  or  pulsatile  instruments. — Clappers  of  bone  or  wood  are 
frequent,  and  various  hollowed  tubes  and  the  like  that  can  be  beaten. 
Castanets  of  shell  or  metal  are  often  found.  Everywhere  rattles  and 
jingles  abound,  made  of  bunches  of  pebbles,  fruit-stones  or  shells  (occa- 
sionally of  a human  skull  filled  with  loose  objects) . All  sorts  of  gongs  or 
tam-tams  occur,  made  of  wood,  stone,  brass,  copper,  iron ; these  some- 
times appear  in  sets,  so  that  rude  melodies  or  harmonies  are  possible. 
The  varieties  of  drum  and  tambourine  are  endless,  all  characterized  by  a 
stretched  head  of  skin  over  a hollow  bowl  or  box,  the  latter  being  usually 
a gourd,  a hollowed  piece  of  wood  (as  the  trunk  of  a tree)  or  a metallic 
vessel.  They  are  sounded  either  by  the  hand  or  by  sticks.  Much  in- 
genuity is  sometimes  shown  in  devising  signals  and  intricate  tattoos,  and 
drums  are  often  used  in  combination. 

A specially  interesting  invention  is  the  African  ‘ marimba1  or  gourd- 
piano.  This  consists  of  a graduated  series  of  gourds  surmounted  by  reso- 
nant pieces  of  wood  that  can  be  struck  by  sticks,  like  the  modern 


30 


PRIMITIVE  MUSIC 


xylophone  or  glass-harmonicon.  Similar  forms  occur  in  Asia  and  else- 
where. 

Stringed  instruments. — The  bow  being  one  of  the  first  implements  of 
hunting  and  warfare,  it  may  have  been  among  the  earliest  of  musical  in- 
struments. Certain  it  is  that  rude  harps  shaped  like  a bow  occur  fre- 
quently among  savages.  The  number  of  strings  varies  from  one  or  two 
upward,  though  the  weakness  of  the  framework  usually  limits  both  num- 
ber and  tension.  Experiments  are  frequent  with  rude  lyres  or  zithers 
having  strings  stretched  over  a resonance-body,  such  as  a flat  piece  of 
wood  or  a hollow  box.  These  types  pass  over  into  rudimentary  lutes, 
having  both  a resonance-box  and  a neck  to  extend  the  strings.  Much 
ingenuity  is  shown  in  making  the  strings  out  of  plant-fibres,  hair,  other 
animal  tissues,  metal.  Many  examples  are  found  of  instruments  sounded 
by  the  friction  of  a bowstring,  prefiguring  the  great  family  of  viols. 


Fig.  6. — Primitive  Harps  and  Zithers,  strung  with  plant-fibres,  gut  or 
bamboo-strips,  and  with  various  devices  for  resonance. 

Occasionally  pieces  of  wood  or  metal  of  different  sizes  are  so  fastened  to 
a resonance-box  that  they  can  be  sounded  by  snapping,  as  in  the  African 
i zanze.’ 


THE  ORIGIN  OF  MUSIC 


3 


Apparently  the  impulse  to  instrument-making  arises  largely 
from  the  desire  for  a sound  to  accentuate  a dance-rhythm  — 
dappers,  whistles,  twanged  strings.  In  prehistoric  remains 
some  bone  whistles  occur,  and  everywhere  pipes  abound. 

Hence  it  has  been  urged  that  flatile  instruments  were  the 
earliest.  Another  theory  is  that  the  order  of  invention  was 
drums,  pipes,  strings.  It  is  better  to  say  that  instruments  were 
first  used  to  keep  time,  then  to  produce  sustained  tones,  then  to 
make  melodies.  The  precise  way  in  which  these  results  were 
secured  probably  varied  with  the  materials  at  hand  and  the 
ingenuity  at  work. 

9.  The  Origin  of  Music. — After  noting  facts  like  these  we 
naturally  ask  how  music  came  into  existence.  It  is  true  that 
external  nature  supplies  suggestions,  as  in  the  sighing  and 
whistling  of  the  wind,  the  rippling  and  roar  of  falling  water,  the 
cries  of  beasts,  the  buzzing  or  calls  of  insects  and  the  songs  of 
birds ; but  the  influence  of  these  on  primitive  song  is  apparently 
slight.  Herbert  Spencer  argued  that  song  is  primarily  a form 
of  speech,  arising  from  the  reflex  action  of  the  vocal  organs 
under  stress  of  emotion  (as  a cry  follows  the  sensation  of  pain). 
More  likely  is  the  hypothesis  that  music  is  derived  from  some 
attempt  to  work  off  surplus  energy  through  bodily  motions,  to 
coordinate  and  decorate  which  rhythmic  sounds,  vocal  or  me- 
chanical, are  employed,  and  that  what  was  at  first  only  an 
accessory  to  dancing  was  finally  differentiated  from  it.  But 
these  speculations  are  not  specially  fruitful. 

The  traditions  of  many  races  recount  the  impartation  of  instruments  or 
of  musical  ideas  to  men  by  the  gods.  These  myths  are  significant,  not 
as  historic  statements  of  fact,  but  as  testimonies  to  the  strange  potency 
and  charm  residing  in  musical  tones. 


CHAPTER  II 


SEMI-CIVILIZED  MUSIC 

10.  In  General.  — Music  enters  the  semi-civilized  stage  along 
with  the  other  activities  of  developing  society.  When  a people 
emerges  from  the  heedless  and  irregular  habits  of  savagery,  its 
music  usually  attracts  enough  reasoning  and  skill  to  make  it  in 
some  sense  artistic.  The  advance  appears  in  heightened  dex- 
terity with  song  and  instruments,  in  more  exactly  defined  styles 
of  composition,  and  in  some  attempt  at  literature  about  music, 
including  often  the  use  of  a notation.  Why  some  peoples  cross 
this  line  and  others  do  not  is  an  enigma.  However  this  may 
be,  brief  reference  must  be  made  to  certain  past  or  present 
systems  of  this  grade,  even  though  our  knowledge  of  them  is 
imperfect  and  though  they  seem  wholly  unconnected  with  our 
own  music. 

Among  existing  systems,  those  of  China,  India  and  the 
Mohammedans  will  be  emphasized,  and  among  ancient  systems, 
those  of  Mesopotamia,  the  Hebrews  and  Egypt — the  latter 
being  probably  rather  more  than  ‘semi-civilized,’  though  de- 
cisive data  are  lacking. 

11.  China.  — From  Chinese  literature  it  appears  that  music 
has  had  a long  and  honorable  history  in  connection  with  Con- 
fucianism and  under  the  patronage  of  the  imperial  court. 
Some  of  the  temple  music  to-day  is  impressive,  and  the  tone- 
system  and  many  instruments  are  notable.  Yet  the  status  of 
popular  music,  as  heard  in  the  streets  and  the  theatres,  is  notori- 
ously low.  Possibly  the  present  is  a time  of  degeneracy  from 
ancient  standards,  or  perhaps  in  past  times  suggestions  of 
progress  were  so  partially  assimilated  as  not  to  affect  general 
use.  It  seems  as  if  music,  having  reached  a certain  point,  be. 
came  fixed,  without  the  power  of  further  advance. 

Tradition  ascribes  the  origin  of  music  to  divine  inspiration,  and  names 
the  Emperors  Fo-Hi  (c.  3000  b.c.)  and  Hoang-Ti  (c.  2600  b.c.)  as  pio- 
neers in  organization.  Confucius  (d.  478  B.c.)  and  his  more  studious 
disciples  seem  to  have  favored  a serious  use  of  music  and  acute  specula- 
tion about  it.  It  is  said  that  actually  hundreds  of  treatises  are  extant 

32 


CHINESE  MUSIC 


33 


upon  the  art,  the  contents  of  which  are  but  slightly  known  to  us.  The 
details  of  music  at  state  and  religious  functions  are  supervised  by  an 
imperial  bureau,  and  degrees  in  music  are  given  on  examination.  Yet 
the  popular  use  of  music  is  limited,  being  largely  in  the  hands  of  travel- 
ing beggars  (often  blind). 

The  tone-system  is  theoretically  complicated.  Its  basis  is 
probably  tetrachordal,  like  the  Greek,  but  in  practice  it  tends 
to  a pentatonic  scale,  discarding  semitones.  But  the  division 
of  the  octave  into  twelve  semitones  is  also  known  and  in  theory 
is  applied  somewhat  intricately.  The  rhythms  of  song  are 
emphatic  and  almost  always  duple.  Some  rudiments  of  har- 
mony are  known,  but  are  rarely  used  except  for  tuning. 

The  tones  of  the  pentatonic  series  may  be  roughly  represented  by  our 
tones  f,  g,  a,  c , d.  They  bear  fantastic  Chinese  names  — ‘ Emperor,’ 
4 Prime  Minister,’  4 Subject  People,’  4 State-Affairs,’  4 Picture  of  the  Uni- 
verse.’ For  each  there  is  a written  character,  so  that  melodies  can  be 
recorded  in  a letter-like  notation,  written  vertically.  Many  melodies 
have  been  transcribed  by  foreign  students.  Their  pentatonic  basis  gives 
them  a peculiar  quaintness,  recalling  old  Scottish  songs.  In  1809  Weber 
took  one  of  these  as  the  theme  for  his  overture  to  Schiller’s  Turandot, 
but  such  adaptations  are  extremely  rare. 

One  peculiarity  of  Chinese  speech  has  musical  significance.  The  lan- 
guage consists  almost  wholly  of  monosyllables,  each  of  which  has  differ- 
ent meanings  according  to  the  4 tone  ’ or  melodic  inflection  with  which  it 
is  pronounced.  It  is  possible  that  these  4 tones,’  which  are  four  or  five 
in  number,  have  relation  to  song.  At  all  events,  dignified  or  poetic  utter- 
ance tends  towards  chanting  or  cantillation. 

It  is  interesting  that  in  cases  where  European  music  has  been  intro- 
duced by  missionaries  it  has  sometimes  been  adopted  with  astonishing 
ease  and  enthusiasm,  extending  even  to  elaborate  part-singing. 

Chinese  instruments  are  numerous  and  important.  But  it  is 
uncertain  which  of  them  are  indigenous  and  which  are  bor- 
rowed from  other  parts  of  Asia.  Native  writers  say  that  nature 
provided  eight  sound-producing  materials  — skin,  stone,  metal, 
clay,  wood,  bamboo,  silk,  gourd  — and  classify  their  instruments 
accordingly. 

Thus  dressed  skin  is  used  in  manifold  tambourines  and  drums,  with 
one  or  two  heads,  the  sizes  running  up  to  large  tuns  mounted  on  a ped- 
estal. Stone  appears  in  plates  of  jade  or  agate,  single  or  in  graduated 
sets,  hung  by  cords  from  a frame  and  sounded  by  a mallet  or  beater,  pro- 
ducing a smooth,  sonorous  tone.  Metal  is  wrought  chiefly  into  bells, 
gongs  and  cymbals  of  many  shapes  and  sizes  (the  gongs  sometimes 
arranged  in  graduated  sets),  but  also  into  long,  slender  trumpets.  Clay 

D 


34 


SEMI-CIVILIZED  MUSIC 


Fig.  io. 

Fig.  7.  — Chinese  Pipas  or  Japanese  Biwas.  Fig.  8. — Chinese  Moon-Guitar  or  Yue^ 
kin.  Fig.  9.  — Chinese  Ur-heen  or  Japanese  Kokiu  — the  bowstring  passes  between  the 
strings.  Fig.  10.  — Japanese  Samisen,  played  with  a wooden  plectrum  tipped  with  ivory. 


CHINESE  MUSIC 


35 


furnishes  whistles  of  the  ocarina  type,  often  molded  into  fantastic  ani- 
mal shapes.  Wood , besides  forming  the  bodies  of  stringed  instruments, 
is  made  into  clappers  or  castanets,  into  curious  boxes  that  are  sounded 
by  striking,  and  into  coarse  oboes  (usually  with  metal  bells  and  other  fit- 
tings). Bamboo  provides  the  tubes  of  both  direct  and  tran verse  flutes, 
with  6-9  finger-holes,  and  for  syrinxes  and  the  ‘ cheng 1 (see  below) . Silk 
furnishes  the  strings  for  zithers  (as  the  ‘che,’  with  25  strings,  and  the  ‘kin,’ 
with  7),  lutes  (as  the  ‘ moon-guitar,’  with  4 strings,  the  ‘pipa,’  also  with  4, 
and  the  ‘ san-heen,’  with  3),  viols  or  fiddles  (as  the  i ur-heen,’  with  2 strings, 
and  the  ‘ hu-kin,’  with  4),  and  bow-zithers  (as  the  ‘ la-kin,’  with  20  strings). 
[Several  other  instruments  are  strung  with  wire,  as  the  ‘yang-kin’  or  dul- 
cimer and  the  ‘ tseng 1 or  bow-zither,  both  with  20  strings.]  A gourd  makes 
the  resonance-bowl  of  the  ‘cheng,’ having  also  some  13  or  more  little  bam- 
boo pipes,  each  of  which  contains  a minute  free  reed  of  brass. 

Bell-founding  is  supposed  to  have  been  acquired  by  Europe  from  China, 
and  the  ‘cheng’  is  the  prototype  of  several  free-reed  instruments  in  Europe 
invented  since  1800,  including  the  accordion  and  the  reed-organ. 


Fig.  11.  — Chinese  Temple  Gong,  Fig.  12.  — Chinese  Cheng 

elaborately  damascened.  and  Japanese  Sho. 

The  Japanese  musical  system  was  derived  from  China,  but 
so  long  ago  that  it  has  now  become  distinct.  The  popular  use 
of  singing  and  of  instruments  is  here  an  almost  universal 
accomplishment  of  importance,  but,  on  the  other  hand,  the 
literary  treatment  of  the  art  is  meagre. 


36 


SEMI-CIVILIZED  MUSIC 


For  a time,  from  1878,  the  Japanese  government  sought  to  establish 
American  methods  of  singing  in  the  public  schools,  and  through  foreign 

intercourse  generally  the  national 
system  is  being  much  modified. 

Japanese  instruments  are  in 
general  replicates  of  the  Chinese, 
but  with  many  variations  of 
detail  and  usually  with  greater 
external  beauty. 

Notable  types  are  the  ‘ koto,1  a 
large  zither  with  6-13  silk  strings, 
and  the  ‘ samisen,1  a lute  with  3 
strings.  The  ‘ kokiu  1 corresponds 
to  the  Chinese  1 ur-heen,1  the  ‘ biwa1 
to  the  4 pipa,1  the  ‘ hyokin’  to  the 
‘ yang-kin,1  the 1 sho 1 to  the 1 cheng,1 
etc. 

12.  India  — The  details  of 
Hindu  music  are  better  known 
than  those  of  Chinese.  Evident- 
ly from  the  time  of  the  Aryan 
immigrations  (c.  2000  b.c.)  much 
attention  has  been  paid  to  the 
art.  But,  since  India  has  been 
repeatedly  invaded  and  even 
subjugated  by  foreign  peoples, 
and  has  been  for  ages  in  close 
commercial  relation  with  Wes- 
tern countries,  no  one  can  say 
what  of  its  music  is  original. 

Native  legends  attribute  the  gift 
of  music  to  the  gods,  and  mythical 
and  mystical  notions  are  frequent 
in  musical  nomenclature  and  writ- 
ing. References  to  music  abound 
in  the  old  literature,  and  musical 
treatises  have  been 
for  centuries. 

music  has  run  to  incredible  intri 
cacies. 


accumulating 
Theorizing  about 


Fig.  13.  — Japanese  Kotos. 


Music  exists  chiefly  in  the  form  of  popular  song  or  as  an 
accompaniment  for  dancing.  In  religious  ceremony  it  is  less 


HINDU  MUSIC 


3 7 


frequent,  though  somewhat  used  by  both  Brahmins  and  Bud- 
dhists. The  singing  of  poems  is  universal,  from  the  old  Sanscrit 
odes  to  the  ballads  of  modern  origin.  Dancing  to  music  is 
very  popular,  and  professional  dancing-girls  are  a feature  at 
social  functions.  Music  is  often  employed  in  pantomimes  and 
plays  having  a mythical,  social  or  fantastic  subject. 

The  training  of  the  Bayaderes  or  Nautch  girls  is  usually  managed  as  a 
business  by  Buddhist  priests,  and  is  often  associated  with  immorality. 

The  tone-system  rests  upon  a primary  division  of  the  octave 
into  seven  steps,  but  more  exactly  into  twenty-two  nearly  equal 
‘ srutis  ’ or  quarter-steps.  These  latter  are  not  all  used  in  any 
single  scale,  but  serve  to  define  with  precision  various  seven- 
tone  scales  that  differ  in  the  location  of  the  shorter  steps  (as 
in  the  mediaeval  modes  of  Europe).  Theory  has  been  so  re- 
fined as  to  name  almost  1000  possible  varieties  of  scale  (not 
to  mention  the  16,000  of  mythical  story).  In  practice  not  more 
than  twenty  of  these  appear,  the  usage  varying  with  locality 
and  tribe.  Most  of  these  scales  are  somewhat  akin  to  ours,  so 
that  melodies  in  them  often  suggest  our  common  modes.  But 
the  intonation  is  usually  obscured  by  plentiful  melodic  decora- 
tions. Many  songs  are  pleasing  and  expressive  to  Occidental 
taste,  the  ancient  ones  having  much  dignity,  but  popular  sing- 
ing often  runs  off  into  weird  and  curious  effects,  probably  due 
to  Mohammedan  influence. 

Triple  rhythms  are  at  least  as  common  as  duple.  The  metric  schemes 
are  apt  to  be  varied  and  complicated,  corresponding  to  those  of  poetry. 
Variations  in  pace  and  accent  are  frequent.  Both  the  pitch  and  duration 
of  tones,  with  various  points  about  execution,  are  indicated  by  a notation 
of  Sanscrit  characters  for  notes,  and  signs  or  words  for  other  details. 

The  art  of  making  instruments  has  been  as  minutely  studied 
as  the  theory  of  scales.  Almost  every  species  of  portable 
instrument  is  known,  and  in  many  varieties.  Native  writers 
indicate  four  classes  — those  with  strings,  those  with  mem- 
branes sounded  by  striking,  those  struck  together  in  pairs,  and 
those  sounded  by  blowing.  Of  these  the  stringed  group  is  by 
far  the  most  characteristic  and  admired.  Percussives  include 
various  drums,  tambourines,  castanets,  cymbals,  gongs,  etc. 
Wind  instruments  include  many  flutes  (though  not  often  of 
the  transverse  kind),  oboes,  bagpipes,  horns  and  trumpets. 


38 


SEMI-CIVILIZED  MUSIC 


* 


Fig.  15. 


MUSIC  IN  SOUTHEASTERN  ASIA 


39 


Certain  forms  are  peculiar  to  special  classes,  like  priests,  travel- 
ing beggars  or  dancing-girls. 


The  characteristic  instrument  is  the 
‘vina,1  which  is  made  in  various  ways, 
usually  with  a cylindrical  body  of  wood 
or  bamboo  reenforced  by  1-3  gourd  res- 
onators, and  having  6-7  wire  strings, 
played  normally  as  a zither  or  lute,  but 
sometimes  with  a bow.  This  shades  off 
into  the  ‘ sitar,1  which  is  a true  lute,  and 
many  other  related  forms.  Among  the 
numerous  viols,  the  ‘ sarinda  ’ or 1 sarungi’ 
is  typical. 

Music  in  the  several  countries  of 
southeastern  Asia  presents  perplexing 
features  in  which  Chinese,  Hindu  and 
Mohammedan  elements  are  mingled. 
In  Burma  and  Siam  the  connection 
is  rather  with  India,  while  in  Java 
the  Chinese  pentatonic  scale  is  ap- 
parently dominant.  Korea,  of  course, 
is  connected  with  Japan  and  China. 
In  each  case  there  is  a national  sys- 
tem, often  of  great 
elaboration,  but  the 
details  are  compar- 
atively unclear. 


Fig.  17. — Hindu  Sarungi. 

More  or  less  characteristic  instruments  are,  in 
Burma,  the  ‘soung,1  a 13-stringed  harp  with  a boat- 
shaped body  and  a gracefully  curved  neck ; in  Siam 
the  1 ranat,1  a good  xylophone  (to  which  there  are 
analogues  in  China 
and  Japan)  ; in  Java, 
the  ‘ galempong,1  re- 
sembling the  Chinese 
‘kin;1  and  in  Korea, 
the  ‘ kamounko,1  cor- 
respondingto  the  Japa- 
nese ‘ koto.1  But  in 
each  country  there  are 
many  other  instru- 
ments of  different 
classes. 


Fig.  18.  — Burmese  Soung. 


40 


SEMI-CIVILIZED  MUSIC 


Fig.  iq.  — Javanese  Anklong  — sets  of  bamboo  tubes  sounded  by  striking.  FIG.  20.  — 
Burmese  or  Javanese  Gong-Piano  — the  player  sits  in  the  centre.  FlG.  21.  — Burmese  or 
Siamese  Crocodile  Harp  or  Zither. 


MOHAMMEDAN  MUSIC 


41 


Fig.  22.  — Chinese  and  Siamese  Ranats. 


13.  The  Mohammedans.  — The  music  associated  with  Arabic 
culture  and  with  Mohammedanism  is  more  widely  spread  than 
any  other  of  its  class.  Yet  it  is  a highly  composite  type  for 
this  very  reason.  It  is  doubtful  whether  there  is  any  real  Ara- 
bian music,  that  is,  music  peculiar  to  Arabia  itself.  But  in 
connection  with  the  stupendous  extension  of  Mohammedanism 
(from  the  8th  century)  along  the  Mediterranean  to  the  Atlantic, 
as  well  as  into  southern  Asia  and  central  Africa,  music  has 
often  been  prominent.  Hence  types  of  music  called  Arabic 
appear  among  the  Saracens  and  Moors  of  the  Middle  Ages,  in 
modern  Egypt  and  Turkey,  and  elsewhere.  These  doubtless 
include  features  from  Persian  sources,  from  ancient  Greek 
usages,  and  from  all  kinds  of  local  sources.  The  historical 
puzzle  thus  presented  is  insoluble.  Yet  some  general  remarks 
may  be  hazarded. 

Mohammedanism  as  a religion  makes  little  use  of  music,  though  ap- 
parently stimulating  it  as  a popular  art.  There  is  a large  literature  about 
music  written  in  Arabic  and  by  Mohammedan  scholars,  but  it  all  belongs 
to  the  mediaeval  period  and  reflects  ideas  from  sources  not  at  all  Arabian. 
This  literature  is  particularly  valuable  for  the  light  it  gives  upon  the 
growth  of  musical  theory ; it  is  also  notable  for  acute  discussions  of  the 
psychical  effects  of  music  (see  sec.  36). 


42 


SEMI-CIVILIZED  MUSIC 


Fig.  25. 


Fig.  23.  — Arab  Kemangehs.  Fig.  24.  — Arab  Kissars  or  Lyres.  FiG.  25.  — Arab 
Kanoon  or  Zither. 


MOHAMMEDAN  MUSIC 


43 


As  commonly  stated,  the  scale  in  characteristically  Moham- 
medan lands  involves  a primary  division  of  the  octave  into  seven 
steps,  derived  from  a theoretical  division  into  seventeen,  each 
equal  to  about  one-third  of  a whole  step.  The  exact  method  of 
determining  these  latter  is  disputed.  There  are  some  eighteen 
seven-tone  scales,  differing  in  the  location  of  the  shorter  steps. 
The  practical  effects  are  not  obviously  akin  to  our  modes,  as 
they  often  emphasize  tones  that  are  irrational  to  us.  But,  even 
more  than  in  Hindu  song,  exactness  of  interval  and  fixity  of 
mode  are  disturbed  by  incessant  slides,  turns,  grace-notes,  shakes, 
and  the  like. 

The  rhythms  and  metric  patterns  are  derived  from  those  of  poetry,  and 
vary  greatly.  Harmony  is  not  cultivated,  except  in  the  rudest  form.  Only 
a bare  beginning  of  a notation  in  letters  has  been  made. 

Several  attempts  have  been  made  to  imitate  or  embody  Arab  melodies 
in  modern  composition  — the  most  famous  being  Felicien  David’s  sym- 
phonic ode  Le  Desert  (1844). 

What  are  called  Arab  instruments  have  in- 
terest in  several  instances  because  they  were 
the  prototypes  of  European  forms  in  the  Mid- 
dle Ages.  In  general,  the  Mohammedans 
in  the  Middle  Ages  were  the  intermediaries 
between  Europe  and  the  East,  and  what  they 
introduced  was  called  Arab  without  distinction. 

Foremost  in  interest  is  the  ‘’ud,’  a lute  with  a 
broad,  pear-shaped  body,  a rather  short  neck  bent 
back  at  the  head,  and  four  or  more  strings.  This 
was  introduced  into  Europe  by  800  a.d.  at  least,  be- 
came popular,  was  imitated  in  manifold  lutes  (the 
word  1 lute  ’ being  taken  from  eVud ),  and  still  sur- 
vives in  the  mandolin.  (See  Fig.  54.)  Another 
similar  type  was  the  ‘tambura,’  with  a smaller 
body,  a longer  neck,  and  only  a few  strings.  Of 
viols,  the  1 rebab  ’ and  the  ‘ kemangeh 1 are  important, 
because  probably  influencing  the  evolution  of  the 
viol  and  the  violin. 

Many  so-called  Arab  instruments  are  probably 
Persian.  One  of  these  is  the  ‘santir,’a  dulcimer  or 
zither  with  many  strings,  akin  to  the  ‘kanoon1  now 
found  in  Egypt  and  adjacent  countries.  (Con- 
cerning mediaeval  Arabic  literature  about  music,  see  Fig.  26.  — Persian 
sec.  36.)  Guitar. 


44 


SEMI-CIVILIZED  MUSIC 


ANCIENT  SYSTEMS 


45 


Ancient  Systems 

14.  Babylonia  and  Assyria.  — We  know  little  about  music  in 
ancient  Mesopotamia,  except  that  the  monuments  depict  some 
instruments  and  imply  the  use  of  singing  and  dancing.  We 
gather  that  music  was  a stated  element  in  religious  and  civic 
functions,  companies  of  performers  forming  parts  of  great  pro- 
cessions, and  infer  that  it  was  under  the  care  of  the  priesthood. 

Among  the  instruments  depicted  are  harps,  dulcimers,  lyres  of  several 
shapes,  lutes,  double  pipes,  trumpets  and  drums.  The  harps  have  many 
strings  stretched  obliquely  from  an  upright  body  or  back  to  a horizontal 
arm  below,  but  have  no  pillar.  The  dulcimers  seem  to  consist  of  a shal- 
low box  held  horizontally,  over  which  metal  strings  are  stretched  so  as  to 
be  sounded  by  little  hammers  (recalling  the  ‘santir’  of  the  modern  Per- 
sians). The  lyres  resemble  those  later  found  among  the  Greeks.  The 
lutes  are  allied  to  those  of  Hindustan  and  the  Orient  generally  — actual 
examples  being  found  in  the  earlier  strata  at  Nippur.  It  is  likely  that  all 
Hebrew  instruments  were  based  on  Babylonian  prototypes. 

It  should  be  noted  that  several  of  the  instruments  mentioned  in 
Dan.  iii.  as  used  in  Babylonia  under  Nebuchadnezzar  (605-562  b.c.)  have 
Greek  names,  whence  it  is  inferred  that  the  author  wrote  after  about  330 
B.c.,  and  named  instruments  then  in  use. 

15.  Israel.  — The  origin  of  the  Hebrews  seems  to  have  been 
in  Arabia,  but  their  geographical  position  involved  close  con- 
tacts with  Mesopotamia  on  the  one  side  and  with  Egypt  on  the 
other.  In  all  matters  of  culture  they  were  imitators  and  bor- 
rowers, so  that  we  infer  that  their  music  was  derived  from 
outside. 

All  the  important  data  about  Hebrew  music  come  from  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, which  consists  of  writings  compiled  not  before  about  the  8th  cen- 
tury B.c.,  with  some  (like  Chronicles)  hardly  earlier  than  the  3d  century. 
The  older  documents  are  singularly  devoid  of  musical  data. 

The  earliest  recorded  application  of  music  in  a serious  way 
was  by  bands  of  4 prophets  * (organized  under  Samuel  before 
1000  b.c.)  as  a means  of  inducing  ecstasy.  Probably  it  was 
used  in  some  way  in  the  First  Temple  (built  c.  950  b.c.),  though 
hardly  to  the  extent  often  supposed.  The  services  of  the  Sec- 
ond Temple  (built  c.  520  b.c.)  certainly  included  singing  with 
instrumental  accompaniment  by  trained  performers.  For  these 
latter  services  the  Book  of  Psalms  appears,  at  least  in  some 
part,  to  have  been  collected  and  edited  as  we  have  it.  In  social 
life  music  was  probably  common,  but  the  references  are  meagre. 


46 


SEMI-CIVILIZED  MUSIC 


The  actual  styles  can  only  be  conjectured.  Song  was  prob- 
ably in  unison,  loud  and  harsh  in  tone,  of  limited  range,  with 
rude  intervals  and  perhaps  many  melodic  embellishments.  It 
is  likely  that  recitative  was  common,  and  that  many  texts  were 
rendered  antiphonally,  following  the  parallelism  of  the  poetic 
text.  Some  forms  of  dance  were  combined  with  religious  song. 

Particular  melodies  are  apparently  mentioned  in  the  editorial  notes  to 
a few  of  the  Psalms,  but  what  they  were  is  unknown.  It  is  supposed  that 
various  terms  found  with  poetic  texts  were  originally  marks  of  musical 
treatment,  but  their  date  and  meaning  are  disputed. 

Many  instruments  are  named,  but  in  default  of  pictorial  delineations 
their  form  cannot  be  determined.  They  include  the  ‘kinnor’  (‘harp’  in 
the  English  Bible,  but  probably  a lyre,  like  the  modern  Egyptian  ‘kissar’), 
the  ‘nebel’  (‘psaltery,’  but  probably  a lute,  like  the  Egyptian  ‘ nofre,’  or 
a harp),  the  ‘ chalil  ’ (‘  pipe,’  either  a flute  or  an  oboe),  two  or  three  kinds 
of  trumpets,  such  as  the  ‘ keren  1 and  ‘ chatzotzerah,’  the  ‘ ’ugab 1 (‘  organ,’ 
but  probably  a syrinx),  cymbals,  tambourines  (‘timbrels’),  sistra,  etc. 

In  later  Judaism  the  importance  of  synagogues  steadily  ad- 
vanced, and  after  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  (70  a.d.)  they  sprang 
up  wherever  Jews  settled,  continuing  to  the  present  day  in  all 
parts  of  the  world.  Synagogue  services  to-day  include  the 
cantillation  of  Scripture  passages  and  of  prayers  and  often  the 
singing  of  psalms.  For  these  exercises  many  traditional  melo- 
dies of  considerable  antiquity  exist.  But  since  the  usages  of 
different  countries  do  not  agree,  these  traditions  do  not  appear 
to  go  back  to  really  ancient  times. 

The  historical  importance  of  Hebrew  music  lies  not  in  what  it  actually 
was,  but  in  the  striking  influence  that  the  fact  of  its  existence  in  connec- 
tion with  religion  has  exerted  upon  Christian  thought  and  customs. 
Modern  Jews  have  often  displayed  eminent  musical  ability,  and  several 
leading  composers,  like  Mendelssohn  and  Meyerbeer,  have  been  of  Jewish 
extraction.  Occasionally  themes  from  synagogue  music  have  been  used 
in  general  composition. 

16.  Egypt.  — It  is  evident  that  from  early  times  the  ancient 
Egyptians  were  extremely  fond  of  music,  especially  as  a social 
diversion,  as  a courtly  luxury,  and  in  religious  ceremony.  It  was 
united  with  poetry  and  with  many  sorts  of  dances.  Professional 
singers,  players  and  dancers  were  common  and  carefully  trained. 
Among  court-officials  musicians  are  often  named  as  prominent. 
It  is  probable  that  the  cultivation  of  music  was  one  of  the  many 
functions  of  the  priesthood. 


ANCIENT  SYSTEMS 


47 


The  Egyptians  were  zealous  in  building  and  in  adorning  what  they  built 
with  records,  and  the  climate  has  preserved  what  they  wrought  as  nowhere 
else  in  the  world.  Accordingly,  in  extant  delineations  on  the  monu- 
ments, as  well  as  in  papyri  and  in  many  actual  objects,  we  have  abundant 
data  for  reconstructing  the  actual  life  of  the  people.  The  use  of  music  is 
thus  profusely  set  before  us,  so  that  it  is  better  known  than  in  any  other 
ancient  land.  But,  unfortunately,  we  have  not  yet  recovered  any  ancient 
Egyptian  treatise  on  the  subject.  Neither  is  there  any  trace  of  a musical 
notation. 

We  have  only  disputed  evidence  as  to  the  recognized  types  of 
scale,  though  from  extant  instruments  it  is  inferred  that  melodies 
were  mostly  diatonic.  That  there  was  some  practical  use  of 
harmony  follows  from  the  depiction  of  groups  of  performers  act- 
ing in  concert,  and  from  the  size  of  the  larger  harps  and  lyres. 
Singing  and  dancing  were  accompanied  by  hand-clapping  to 
mark  the  rhythm. 

The  historic  importance  of  this  extensive  musical  activity  is  evident, 
for  in  the  7th  century  b.c.,  Egypt  was  opened  to  the  Greeks,  and  inter- 
course with  the  north  and  west  rapidly  increased,  until  ultimately  Egypt 
became  one  of  the  chief  centres  of  Greek  culture.  Nearly  all  the  impor- 
tant Greek  works  on  musical  theory  were  written  in  Egypt,  and  none  of 
them  intimates  that  Egyptian  views  differed  radically  from  the  Greek. 
Hence  we  conclude  that  the  Greek  ideas  of  music  were  largely  supplied 
or  suggested  by  Egyptian  usage  or  speculation.  If  this  be  so,  the  genesis 
of  the  mediaeval  system  of  Europe  is  to  be  traced  to  Egypt  as  well  as  to 
the  Greeks. 

Egyptian  instruments  were  numerous  and  varied.  Apparently 
they  were  developed  for  tonal  results,  without  excessive  attention 
to  outward  ornamentation,  though  some  of  the  harps  were  very 
rich.  They  were  regularly  used  in  interesting  combinations,  im- 
plying attention  to  concerted  effects. 

Stringed  instruments  were  evidently  favorites.  Most  conspicuous  are 
the  harps,  in  three  varieties  — the  small,  shaped  like  a bow  and  carried 
horizontally  on  the  shoulder,  the  medium,  also  bow-shaped,  but  held 
upright  by  a seated  player,  and  the  large,  loop-shaped,  with  a massive 
body,  often  sumptuously  decorated  with  color  and  carving,  played  from  a 
standing  posture.  All  these  lack  the  upright  pillar  beyond  the  strings, 
and  must  have  been  rather  grave  in  pitch  and  unstable  in  tune.  The 
number  of  strings  varies  from  three  to  twenty  or  more.  Next  in  impor- 
tance are  the  lyres,  having  a resonance-box  below,  a U-shaped  frame  with 
a cross-bar  above,  whence  five  to  many  strings  were  stretched  downward ; 
these  were  held  horizontally  under  the  arm  or  set  upright  on  a table  or 
pedestal,  and  were  played  with  a plectrum  or  the  finger-tips.  Less  impor- 
tant are  the  lutes,  known  in  the  Old  Kingdom  only  from  a hieroglyphic 


48 


SEMI-CIVILIZED  MUSIC 


Fig.  31.  — Egyptian  Shoulder 
Harp  or  Buni  (model  from  actual 
specimen). 

Fig.  32.  — Egyptian  Harp  and 
Harpist  (from  a wall-painting). 

Fig.  33.  — Egyptian  Harp  or 
Buni  (model  from  actual  speci- 
men). 

Fig.  34.  — Egyptian  Lute  or 
Nofre  (model  from  actual  speci- 
men). 

Fig.  35.  — Egyptian  Harp  and 
Harpist  (from  a wall-painting) . 


Fig.  35. 


ANCIENT  SYSTEMS 


49 


sign,  but  later  found  with  1-5  strings,  which  were  stopped  against  a fretted 
neck  and  sounded  with  a plectrum.  Some  of  these,  with  the  trigons — 
triangular,  many-stringed  harps — were  perhaps  of  foreign  origin. 
Viols  and  dulcimers  seem  to  be  lacking. 

The  wind  instruments  include  both  direct  and  transverse  flutes,  the 
former  often  double  and  sometimes  blown  by  the  nose,  and  all  often 
having  several  finger-holes  ; oboes,  often  double,  provided  with  finger-holes 
and  sounded  by  reeds  made  of  straw;  trumpets  of  copper  or  bronze, 
chiefly  used  for  military  purposes ; and  perhaps  the  syrinx.  [The  fact 
that  the  principle  of  the  organ  was  first  applied  in  Egypt  (in  the  Greek 
period)  raises  the  query  whether  perhaps  it  may  not  have  been  known 
there  earlier.] 

Percussives  are  numerous,  including  clappers  of  bone  or  ivory,  cymbals, 
sistra  — metal  frames  with  loose,  rattling  rods  — tambourines,  and  at 
least  two  sorts  of  drums,  besides  several  trivial  jingles  worn  by  dancers. 
Apparently  there  were  no  true  bells  or  gongs. 


CHAPTER  III 


GREEK  AND  ROMAN  MUSIC 

17.  In  General.  — The  Greek  mind  was  both  analytic  and 
constructive.  In  all  the  fine  arts  it  seized  upon  styles  already  in 
existence  and  speedily  developed  them  with  a scope  and  ideality 
unknown  before.  In  the  case  of  music,  this  expansion  was 
notably  scientific  and  philosophical  as  well  as  technical.  Though 
the  conclusions  reached  were  limited  by  various  causes,  they 
were  yet  acute  for  their  time  and  have  since  been  highly  influ- 
ential. In  Greek  music  we  find  the  immediate  source  of  early 
mediaeval  music  and  thus  indirectly  of  modern  music. 

Our  knowledge  of  Greek  music  is,  however,  one-sided,  being  drawn 
almost  wholly  from  works  about  music  rather  than  from  examples.  Of 
the  practical  working  of  the  system  we  know  little,  except  that  music  was 
joined  more  intimately  with  poetry  and  with  general  culture  than  is  now 
common. 

It  is  not  easy  to  mark  off  the  historic  stages  in  musical  devel- 
opment, except  in  a very  rough  and  general  way.  The  following 
periods,  however,  are  to  be  borne  in  mind  : — 

The  Mythical  or  Heroic  Age  — the  time  of  the  itinerant  minstrel  or 
bard  — prior  to  about  675  B.C.,  when  popular  contests  in  music  and  poetry 
began  in  Sparta. 

The  Classical  Period,  culminating  in  the  5th  century  B.C.,  but  continu- 
ing till  the  downfall  of  Greek  independence  in  338,  during  which  the 
practice  of  music-poetry  was  developed,  chiefly  at  Athens  or  near  by. 

The  Alexandrian  Period,  from  about  325  B.c.  to  the  Christian  Era  and 
after,  in  which  the  older  versatile  originality  gave  place  to  scientific  criti- 
cism or  mere  imitation,  chiefly  at  Alexandria. 

The  Roman  Period,  from  the  time  of  Augustus  until  the  Roman 
Empire  was  dissolved,  during  which  all  the  arts  of  Greece  were  exten- 
sively adopted,  often  in  degenerate  forms,  by  the  dominant  peoples  to 
the  west. 

From  all  these  periods  we  find  mention  of  musical  performers,  teachers 
and  theorists,  some  of  whom  are  named  below. 

18.  Union  of  Music  with  Poetry. — In  Greek  thought  what  we 
call  poetry  and  music  were  intimately-blended,  both  being  held 

5° 


UNION  OF  MUSIC  WITH  POETRY 


51 


to  be  inspired  by  the  Muses  (whence  the  term  ^ovaucrj,  with  a 
far  wider  meaning  than  our  word  ‘music’).  Poetry  was  felt 
to  require  delivery  in  song  for  its  complete  expression,  while 
music  had  little  importance  except  to  embody  poetry.  So  the 
history  of  Greek  poetry  and  music  is  a single  subject.  The  poets 
were  themselves  singers,  and  their  works  were  meant  to  be 
chanted  by  readers  and  interpreters  so  as  to  be  received  into  ap- 
preciation through  the  ear.  This  does  not  mean  that  the  poet 
composed  fixed  melodies  for  his  verses,  but  that  each  species  of 
poetry  had  a recognized  style  of  cantillation,  well  enough  known 
to  be  used  freely  by  many  persons.  Common  education  was 
expected  to  give  such  familiarity  with  these  musical  styles  as  to 
preserve  and  disseminate  them.  Some  sort  of  musical  improvi- 
sation was  probably  not  uncommon  in  cultivated  circles  gen- 
erally. 

The  first  style  to  become  established  was  apparently  the  epic,  culti- 
vated by  wandering  bards  who  intoned  their  verses,  whether  memorized 
or  improvised,  to  a slender  accompaniment  on  the  lyre  or  some  similar 
instrument.  The  historic  masters  here  were  Homer  and  Hesiod  (9th 
and  8th  centuries  b.c.). 

Later  several  more  condensed  forms  became  popular,  such  as  the  Ionic 
iambics  and  elegiacs  — hymns  and  odes  of  a celebrative  or  commemora- 
tive character  — represented  by  Archilochos  and  Tertaios  (early  7th  cen- 
tury) ; the  lyrics  of  Lesbos  and  other  islands  — brief  songs  of  special 
delicacy  and  point  in  varied  verse-forms  — represented  by  Alkaios,  Sap- 
pho and  Anakreon  (early  6th  century)  ; and  the  Dorian  choral  songs 
and  the  dithyrambs  of  the  Dionysiac  and  other  mystic  rites  — stronger 
and  broader  festal  hymns  intended  to  be  chanted  by  companies  of  people 
in  unison  — represented  by  Ter  pander , Arion,  Stesichoros , Simonides  and 
Pindar  (c.  650-450). 

Side  by  side  with  these  latter  developed  the  Attic  drama,  both  tragic 
and  comic,  with  a complex  union  of  solo  and  choral  declamation,  lyric 
and  half-epic,  on  the  part  of  carefully  trained  performers  — represented, 
in  tragedy,  by  Aischylos , Sophokles  and  Euripides , and,  in  comedy,  by 
Aristophanes  and  Antiphanes  (from  about  500). 

The  drama  was  peculiarly  important,  since  it  was  a culminat- 
ing and  comprehensive  form  that  utilized  the  best  features  in 
preceding  efforts  and  served  to  make  them  widely  popular. 
The  social  prominence  of  the  drama  is  attested  by  the  remains 
of  splendid  theatres  in  every  part  of  the  old  Greco-Roman  world. 

Another  institution  intimately  connected  with  the  growth  of 
music-poetry  was  the  series  of  festival-contests  regularly  held 


52 


GREEK  AND  ROMAN  MUSIC 


at  various  places,  such  as  the  Olympian  in  Elis,  the  Pythian 
at  Delphi,  the  Nemean  in  Argolis  and  the  Isthmian  at  Corinth, at 
which  occurred  not  only  competitions  in  physical  prowess,  but 
equally  strenuous  rivalries  in  literary  and  musical  art.  These 
festivals  were  attended  by  great  throngs,  and  their  stimulus 
was  felt  far  and  wide,  attracting  contestants  from  distant  lands. 

Regarding  these  two  institutions,  the  Drama  and  the  Games,  it  is  to  be 
noted  that  the  impress  of  the  former  again  and  again  affected  the  unfold- 
ing of  the  mediaeval  and  modern  drama,  especially  the  opera,  while  the 
latter  was  frequently  paralleled  in  the  age  of  the  Troubadours  and  Min- 
nesinger (see  secs.  38,  40). 

19.  Actual  Effects.  — We  are  thrown  back  largely  upon  con- 
jecture as  to  the  actual  style  of  this  antique  song.  Extant 
literary  references  are  not  vivid,  and  mostly  date  from  long 
after  the  most  productive  periods.  Of  surely  authentic  melo- 
dies we  have  only  a few  mutilated  specimens  — the  chief  being 
the  noble  Hymn  to  Apollo  discovered  at  Delphi  in  1893,  which 
was  a paean  composed  by  an  Athenian  to  celebrate  the  repulse 
of  the  Goths  in  279  b.c. 

It  is  evident  that  most  melodies  were  decidedly  minor,  with 
a tonality  unlike  ours  and  some  strange  intervals.  Doubtless 
most  singing  was  by  male  voices  in  unison,  the  usual  pitch  be- 
ing high  and  the  quality  somewhat  strident.  The  rhythmic  and 
metric  patterns  were  certainly  varied  and  often  intricate,  regu- 
lated by  the  quantities  and  accents  of  the  text  rather  than 
by  independent  time-schemes  as  in  modern  music.  Harmony 
may  have  been  used  somewhat  in  the  union  of  voices,  of  voices 
with  instruments,  and  of  groups  of  instruments ; but  details  are 
lacking. 

In  the  later  periods  the  production  of  original  poetry  became  steadily 
more  feeble  and  less  associated  with  music,  while  the  latter  lapsed  from  a 
dignified  fine  art  to  a careless  amusement.  It  passed  largely  into  the 
hands  of  slaves  and  vagrant  minstrels,  so  that  it  fell  to  the  status  of  a 
mere  trade.  Doubtless  some  of  the  refinements  of  early  days  were 
abandoned.  Wherever  Greek  music  went  outside  of  Greece,  it  was  inevi- 
tably conglomerated  with  local  usages. 

It  is  not  clear  just  how  instruments  were  employed  in  accom- 
paniment or  independently.  Doubtless  their  primary  purpose 
was  to  support  the  voice  in  singing,  either  by  doubling  the 


INSTRUMENTS 


53 


melody  or  by  adding  some  tones  to  it.  But  evidently  there 
was  some  independent  development  of  lyre-  and  flute-playing, 
as  performers  are  often  mentioned  with  honor  and  there  was  a 
special  notation  for  instrumental  music. 

The  stringed  instruments  were  conspicuous,  including  the  characteristic 
Myra,’  consisting  of  a resonance-box  (sometimes  a tortoise-shell),  a 
U-shaped  frame  with  a crosspiece,  and  4-18  sinew  strings  ; the  ‘ kithara1 
or  ‘kitharis’  (also  called  ‘phorminx’),  apparently  the  older  form  of  the 
lyre,  but  later  distinguished  from  it  by  having  the  strings  carried  partly 
over  the  body  instead  of  being  attached  to  its  upper  edge  ; the  ‘ magadis,’ 
an  Oriental  harp  of  varying  shape  and  with  perhaps  20  strings  : and  the 
‘ barbitos  ’ and  ‘ trigon,1  many-stringed  harps  of  special  form.  All  of  these 
were  played  either  by  the  finger-tips  or  with  a plectrum.  The  shape  and 
ornamentation  of  the  lyres  were  ingeniously  varied. 

The  other  principal  class  was  the  wind  instruments,  including  espe- 
cially the  ‘ aulos,1  a direct  flute  of  cane  or  bored  wood,  with  a detachable 
mouth-piece  and  from  two  to  several  finger-holes,  in  which,  in  later  times 
at  least,  were  little  movable  stopples  whereby  the  pitch  could  be  slightly 
modified.  Auloi  were  often  made  double,  either  to  give  greater  power 
or  a wider  range.  The  player  often  wore  a capistrum  or  cheek-strap  to 
keep  the  instrument  in  place  and  to  support  the  cheeks.  Sometimes 
auloi  were  attached  to  a distensible  bag,  making  a bagpipe.  The  ‘ salpinx 1 
was  a straight,  tapering  trumpet  of  bronze,  apparently  without  finger- 
holes.  The  ‘ syrinx 1 or  Pan’s-pipe  was  a series  of  graduated  tubes  sounded 
by  blowing  across  the  open  ends  — peculiarly  a pastoral  instrument. 

A rudimentary  form  of  organ  invented  at  Alexandria  by  the  mechani- 
cian Ktesibios  about  175  b.c.,  passed  into  vogue  among  the  wealthy  in 
different  parts  of  the  Roman  Empire  and  was  thus  handed  over  to  Chris- 
tian use.  The  details  of  the  first  construction  are  unknown,  but  in  Roman 
times,  as  we  know  from  various  sources,  including  a remarkable  clay  model 
of  the  2d  century  a.d.  found  at  Carthage,  there  were  often  2-3  sets  of 
pipes  mounted  on  a wind-chest,  a simple  keyboard  or  set  of  valve-levers, 
and  an  ingenious  device  to  supply  compressed  air  by  a pair  of  pumps 
partially  filled  with  water  — whence  the  Latin  name  ‘ hydraulus  1 or  ‘ water- 
organ.1 

20.  Acoustical  and  Theoretical  Research.  — This  side  of  Greek 
music  is  far  better  known  than  any  other,  since  most  of  the  lit- 
erature that  we  have  treats  of  it  extensively.  From  as  early 
as  the  7th  century  b.c.  the  physical  analysis  of  tones  and  their 
relations  was  undertaken,  with  studies  in  the  formal  definition 
of  scales. 

Pythagoras , the  famous  philosopher  and  social  leader  — born  in  Samos 
in  582  b.c.,  educated  by  long  residence  in  Egypt  and  extensive  travel,  and 
finally  teaching  in  southern  Italy  — was  the  chief  pioneer.  He  laid  the 
foundation  of  musical  acoustics  as  a science,  and  started  a school  of  inves- 


54 


GREEK  AND  ROMAN  MUSIC 


Fig.  38. 


Figs.  36,  37.  — Greek  Lyres  or  Kitharas 
(models  of  actual  specimens  found  in 
Egypt). 

FIG.  38.  — Greek  Hydraulus  or  Water- 
Organ  (clay  figurine,  2d  century,  found 
at  Carthage) . 


Fig.  37. 


TETRACHORDS  AND  MODES 


55 


tigators  that  lasted  long  after  the  Christian  Era.  His  followers  tended  to 
regulate  all  musical  procedure  by  mathematics,  and  the  opposition  long 
continued  between  them  and  the  disciples  of  Aristoxenos , born  about  354 
B.C.,  who  advocated  taste  and  instinct  as  normative  principles. 

Through  these  studies,  with  experiments  in  singing  and 
instrument-making,  an  extensive  theoretical  tone-system  was 
gradually  developed.  The  shaping  and  nomenclature  of  this 
were  largely  determined  by  the  constant  use  of  the  lyre.  From 
the  first  the  comprehensive  units  recognized  were  the  octave 
and  the  tetrachord  (a  series  of  four  tones  within  the  interval  of 
a fourth).  All  tone-series  were  reckoned  downward  instead  of 
upward  (as  in  modern  music). 

Three  1 genera,1  or  ways  of  dividing  the  tetrachord,  were  used  : {a)  the 
diatonic,  consisting  of  two  whole  steps  or  1 tones 1 and  a half-step  or 
hemitone,  (b)  the  chromatic,  consisting  of  an  extra  long  step  with  two 
half-steps,  and  (y)  the  enharmonic,  consisting  of  a double-step  with  two 
quarter-steps.  These  arrangements  may  be  illustrated  through  modern 
letter-names  thus : — 

Diatonic,  ED  C B 
Chromatic,  E C#  C B 
Enharmonic,  E CC^B 

The  diatonic  genus  was  felt  to  be  the  most  important  of  the  three,  and 
as  it  is  the  form  that  has  had  historic  influence  since,  it  will  be  the  only 
one  taken  for  further  illustration  here. 

Within  a diatonic  tetrachord  all  the  three  possible  arrangements 
of  half-steps  were  utilized  — the  Dorian,  with  the  half-step  below,  the 
Phrygian,  with  it  in  the  middle,  and  the  Lydian,  with  it  above.  These 
may  be  illustrated  thus  : — 

Dorian,  E D C B 

Phrygian,  E DC#  B <?r  D C B A 

Lydian,  ED#  C#  B or  C B A G 

Various  1 species 1 or  octave-scales  were  constructed  by  joining  two  simi- 
lar tetrachords  together  and  adding  one  step  to  complete  the  octave. 
Seven  such  species  or  modes  were  recognized,  formed  in  three  ways,  ac- 
cording to  the  position  of  the  added  step  : — 


Dorian  species  or  mode, 

1 — 
E 

D 

C 

B 

1 — 
A 

G 

F 

E 

Phrygian  species  or  mode, 

D 

C 

B 

A 

G 

F 

E 

D 

Lydian  species  or  mode, 

C 

B 

A 

G 

F 

E 

D 

C 

Hypodorian  species  or  mode, 

A 

G 

F 

1 1 
E 

D 

C 

B 

A 

Hypophrygian  species  or  mode, 

G 

F 

E 

D 

C 

B 

A 

G 

Hypolydian  species  or  mode, 

F 

E 

D 

C 

B 

A 

G 

F 

Mixolydian  species  or  mode, 

B 

A 

G 

F E 

D 

C 

1 

B 

The  Complete  System 


56 


GREEK  AND  ROMAN  MUSIC 


Tetrachords 


Extreme 


— 


— 1 


rr= zgrgza 


a 


< b ^ w Q 


u cq 


<J  OfeWQUPQ< 


a> 


<D  ^ 


•3 

•g 


•a 

1 

£ 


2 3 

1! 


'T3  O 
*3  O * ° 
flj  o O m 

rjj-s* 

£ o 
3 0 « tii 

"oT  to  i3 
^ J £2 

<U  - £ ~ 


8!a 


C+H 

0 

CU 

C/3 

U-I 

O S 

bn 

0) 

X! 

bn  a 

.£ 

-M 

CU 

.£  Si 

be 
* a 

zl 


^ o ^ ‘3 
« -v,  S S 

ii|y 

O ^ M>  O 

Z<V. 


5 

^0 


'3  § S 
£ 

6 

Of) 

< 

-v — ' 

•V 

<2> 

5» 


- *i 
■8  ■§: 


§0 


. ^ 

^ Oj 

* =§  § 


5 •■§  3 S 

J3  ,k  ^ « 

♦s  s <;  s 


| 2 
ft  $ 


^3 
<u  S 
£3  £ 

5 <u 
£ -5 

CU  <-4-, 

6 0 
C!  &jo 

o .s 

be  t 
.£  w 
i:  aj 


“ 2 'S 
& Z 2 

<U  <U  73 
^ g-  rt 

J_  CL  S-, 

a 3 S 
s « r 
3 ■£  fe 

<U  »+h  CL 
o CL 

^ be  3 


u 0 

« be 


a! 

.£ 

V2 

>-1 

CL 

3 

H 

CU 

3 

0 

c n 

bn 

£3 

O 

X 

cu 

cc 

(U 

X 

CU 

CL 

O 

<u 

Z 

£> 

Uh 

2 

« •«$ 
^ ^ O 


5 « 

bt  ^ 


to  q ^ 
$ Sk,  ^ 

* S 


<u 

.3  a 
i!  o 

c n +J 
j-  T3 
<U  CU 
CL  TJ 
CL  T3 
£ < 


k |l 

<5  $ 


The  tone  Mese  fulfills  something  of  the  office  of  a keynote. 

The  conjunct  tetrachord  is  an  extra  feature,  taking  the  place  of  the  disjunct  tetrachord  when  a sort  of  modulation 
is  desired.  The  names  of  the  two  are  derived  from  the  relations  to  the  middle  tetrachord,  the  disjunct  standing 
one  step  away  from  the  latter,  while  the  conjunct  joins  it  directly. 


THE  COMPLETE  SYSTEM 


5 7 


[It  should  be  observed  that  this  use  of  letter-names  is  not  intended  to 
indicate  the  absolute  pitch.  For  convenience,  the  modes  are  here  made 
to  begin  at  different  points.  The  essential  difference  between  them  lies 
in  the  position  of  the  short  steps,  and  they  should  properly  begin  with 
the  same  tone.] 

Of  the  seven  species,  the  Dorian  was  the  most  admired,  but  apparently 
melodies  were  composed  in  all.  The  several  species  were  felt  to  differ 
widely  in  aesthetic  and  moral  quality,  which  was  much  discussed  by 
thoughtful  critics. 

What  was  called  the  ‘Complete  System’  was  a scheme  of  tones 
comprising  two  octaves  and  composed  of  four  Dorian  tetra- 
chords  (one  of  which  varied  slightly  in  form).  The  various 
species  or  modes  were  understood  to  be  imbedded  in  this  sys- 
tem, each  including  a particular  octave.  While  for  theoretical 
purposes  the  system,  with  its  included  species,  was  assumed  as 
a fixed  standard  or  formula,  its  absolute  pitch  might  be  higher 
or  lower  as  the  performer  might  choose  — that  is,  it  might  be 
transposed.  But  in  Greek  thought  every  such  transposition  had 
a character  of  its  own,  even  though  the  relation  of  the  tones  was 
unchanged.  Furthermore,  similar  systems  were  elaborated  for 
the  chromatic  and  enharmonic  genera,  as  well  as  for  the  diatonic. 

To  each  tone  of  the  system  a specific  name  was  given,  designating 
both  the  tetrachord  to  which  it 
belonged  and  its  place  therein. 

This  cumbrous  nomenclature  was 
taken  from  the  lyre,  each  tone  be- 
longing to  a particular  string.  The 
acuter  tones  were  called  * last 1 or 
1 lowest  ’ and  the  graver  ones  ‘ high- 
est ’ simply  because  lyres  were  held 
with  the  longer  strings  uppermost. 

21.  Notation. — The  modern  let- 
ter-names for  tones  used  in  the 
foregoing  sections  were  not  used 
by  the  Greeks.  Besides  the  long 
descriptive  names  from  the  lyre, 
however,  they  did  employ  letters 
and  letter-like  characters,  so  that  it 
was  possible  to  indicate  with  preci- 
sion any  given  tone  in  either  the  dia- 
tonic, the  chromatic  or  the  enhar- 


Fig.  39. — Fragment  of  Hymn 
to  Apollo , showing  notation  above 
the  text. 


58 


GREEK  AND  ROMAN  MUSIC 


monic  genus.  For  this  purpose  they  not  only  used  all  the  twenty- 
four  letters  of  their  alphabet,  but  supplemented  them  by  the 
same  characters  inverted  or  turned  on  either  side,  besides  a few 
other  signs.  Two  different  sets  of  such  letter-signs  were  used 
for  vocal  and  instrumental  music  respectively,  the  latter  being 
the  older  and  simpler.  Some  use  was  made  of  small  marks  to 
show  the  relative  length  of  tones;  and  there  was  a sign  for  a 
silence  or  rest. 

In  teaching  singing,  syllable-names  were  sometimes  given  to  the  tones 
of  a tetrachord  (la,  te,  to,  te ). 

22.  Roman  Music.  — It  is  not  unlikely  that  music  among  the 
Latins  derived  something  from  the  earlier  Etruscans  or  from 
the  enterprising  Greek  colonies  in  southern  Italy  and  Sicily 
prior  to  the  founding  of  Rome,  but  about  this  nothing  positive 
is  known.  Music  in  Italy  seems  to  have  had  little  importance 
until  after  the  conquest  of  Greece  in  the  2d  century  b.c.,  when 
Greek  art-works  and  artists  were  scattered  far  and  wide.  Then, 
and  still  more  under  the  Empire,  all  Roman  education,  art  and 
letters  came  under  the  direction  of  Greek  teachers  and  models. 
As  luxury  increased,  the  importation  of  singers,  players  and  dan- 
cers from  all  parts  of  the  Orient  became  fashionable,  though 
these  performers  were  nearly  all  slaves  and  socially  despised. 

The  Romans,  therefore,  contributed  little  to  musical  progress, 
except  that  under  their  domination  immense  numbers  of  musi- 
cians were  attracted  to  Rome,  and  thus  the  knowledge  of  Greek 
styles  was  spread  widely  into  the  West.  Some  details  of  theory, 
of  tuning,  and  of  notation  were  improved,  and  all  kinds  of  instru- 
ments were  used  and  somewhat  modified.  But  the  status  of 
musical  art  was  not  at  all  what  it  had  been  in  Greece. 

23.  Literature  about  Music. — The  total  number  of  classical 
works  on  music  that  are  now  known  is  perhaps  seventy,  of  which, 
however,  about  one-third  are  known  only  by  title,  author  or  topic, 
while  many  others  exist  only  in  brief  citations  or  other  fragmen- 
tary shape.  But  the  bulk  of  writings  more  or  less  available  for 
study  is  far  from  small. 

As  the  data  on  this  subject  are  not  easily  accessible,  a brief  summary  is 
here  appended : — 

From  the  6th  and  5th  centuries  B.c.  we  have  only  some  bare  names,  of 
which  the  chief  is  Pythagoras,  the  founder  of  a whole  school  of  later  writers 
on  acoustics  (the  Canonici),  but  who  seems  himself  to  have  left  no  writings. 


MUSICAL  LITERATURE 


59 


The  4th  century  is  far  more  important.  Early  in  the  century  is  Plato 
(429-347),  the  incomparable  idealist,  whose  ‘Timaios1  is  largely  devoted  to 
music,  not  to  speak  of  allusions  in  other  dialogues.  His  famous  pupil  Aris- 
totle (384-322)  is  said  to  have  written  a musical  treatise,  now  lost,  besides 
many  passages  in  extant  works  — not  counting  the  ‘Problems1  once  ascribed 
to  him.  Among  his  followers  were  Adrastos,  from  whose  ‘Harmonics1  some 
extracts  have  survived;  and  especially  Aristoxenos  of  Tarentum  (b.  c.  354), 
whose  ‘ Harmonic  Elements 1 is  our  earliest  complete  treatise,  and  of  whose 
‘Rhythmic  Elements1  some  fragments  exist.  He  stands  at  the  head  of  a 
school  (the  Harmonici)  hostile  to  the  extreme  mathematical  notions  of  the 
Pythagoreans. 

In  the  3d  century  the  great  name  is  Euclid,  the  Alexandrian  geometer,  to 
whom  two  complete  treatises  have  been  ascribed,  that  on  the  ‘ Partition  of  the 
Canon1  probably  with  right,  while  the  ‘Harmonic  Introduction1  is  now 
thought  to  be  by  Kleonides.  The  latter  belongs  in  the  2d  century,  along  with 
Eratosthenes  and  Hero,  both  Alexandrians. 

From  the  1st  century  we  have  Philodemos  the  Epicurean,  whose  diatribe  on 
the  uselessness  of  music  was  found  at  Herculaneum ; and  the  Alexandrian 
grammarian  Didymos  (b.  63),  among  whose  many  works  several  on  music 
are  quoted,  and  to  whom  an  account  of  the  strife  between  the  Canonici  and  the 
Harmonici  is  attributed,  perhaps  improperly.  Here  Latin  writers  appear  for 
the  first  time,  including  Lucretius  (95-51),  treating  the  origin  of  music  in  his 
‘ De  rerum  natura1 ; Cicero  (106-44)  and  Horace  (65-8),  both  evidently  musical 
connoisseurs ; and  Vitruvius,  who  includes  musical  references  in  his  great 
work  ‘ De  architectural 

After  the  Christian  Era,  to  the  1st  century  belongs  the  elder  Pliny  (22-79), 
whose  ‘Historia  mundi1  often  mentions  music.  Greek  writers  include 
Plutarch  (50-120),  the  author  of  the  earliest  extant  historical  book  ; Dio,  among 
whose  eighty  orations  are  many  musical  remarks  ; and  Aristides  Quintilianus, 
who  has  left  an  important  work  ‘ On  Music.1 

In  the  2d  century  the  names  are  many  and  striking.  Here  belong  Claudius 
Ptolemaeus  of  Alexandria,  whose  ‘Harmonics1  is  one  of  our  chief  sources; 
Theon  of  Smyrna,  whose  expansion  of  certain  of  Plato’s  ideas  is  partially  pre- 
served ; Gaudentios,  an  Aristoxenian,  whose  ‘ Harmonic  Manual1  is  extant ; and 
Bacchios  the  elder,  whose  ‘Introduction  to  Music1  is  important.  Besides 
these  appear  remarks  of  a more  or  less  gossipy  nature  from  Gellius,  a Roman 
dilettant,  the  satirist  Lucian  (125-200),  and  Athenaios  (b.  160),  an  Alex- 
andrian rhetor. 

To  the  3d  century  are  assigned  Aelian,  whose  so-called  ‘History1  supplies 
some  citations  ; Diogenes  Laertios,  who  gives  some  biographical  details  ; and 
Porphyry  (233-305),  the  commentator  upon  Claudius  Ptolemaeus. 

The  4th  century  is  marked  by  Alypios,  whose  ‘Musical  Introduction,1  pre- 
served in  part,  is  of  the  greatest  value  as  the  key  to  Greek  musical  notation. 

The  5th  century  supplies  Macrobius,  whose  ‘Commentary1  includes  a fruit- 
less discussion  of  ‘the  music  of  the  spheres1 ; Proclus  (412-485),  with  a com- 
mentary on  Plato’s  ‘ Timaios1 ; and  Martianus  Capella,  a Roman  grammarian, 


6o 


GREEK  AND  ROMAN  MUSIC 


the  ninth  book  of  whose  ‘Satyricon1  is  wholly  on  music,  while  other  books 
contain  quotations. 

In  the  6th  century  came  Boethius  (475-525),  whose  ‘De  musica’  has  been 
a mine  for  students  ever  since,  albeit  a somewhat  treacherous  one. 

At  intervals  in  later  centuries  other  writers  appear,  mostly  Byzantines, 
whose  works  furnish  useful  points.  The  long  roll  ends  with  Manuel  Bryennios 
(c.  1320),  whose  ‘Harmonics1  is  really  a compend  of  extracts  from  earlier 
writers,  often  of  great  value. 


PART  II 


MEDIAEVAL  MUSIC 


PART  II 


MEDIAEVAL  MUSIC 

Chap.  IV.  The  Rise  of  Christian  Music. 

24.  General  Survey. 

25.  The  First  Christian  Songs. 

26.  The  Gregorian  Style. 

27.  Its  Technical  System. 

28.  The  Hexachord-System. 

29.  Notation. 

30.  The  Letter-Names. 

31.  Certain  Pioneers. 

32.  Instruments. 

Chap.  V.  Polyphony  and  Secular  Song. 

33.  The  Polyphonic  Idea. 

34.  Time  and  its  Notation. 

35.  Organum,  Discant  and  Measured  Music. 

36.  Literature  about  Music. 

37.  Secular  Song. 

38.  The  Troubadours. 

39.  The  Trou veres. 

40.  The  Minnesinger. 

41.  The  Meistersinger. 

Chap.  VI.  The  Fifteenth  Century. 

42.  In  General. 

43.  The  Netherlands  the  New  Art-Centre. 

44.  Secular  Melodies  and  the  Mass. 

45.  First  Group  of  Masters. 

46.  Second  Group  of  Masters. 

47.  Third  Group  of  Masters. 

48.  Folk-Music. 

49.  Its  Technical  Features. 

50.  The  Minstrel  Class. 

51.  Instruments. 

152.  Tablatures. 


62 


CHAPTER  IV 


THE  RISE  OF  CHRISTIAN  MUSIC 

24.  General  Survey. — The  historical  transition  from  Greek 
music  to  that  of  the  12th  to  the  14th  centuries  is  not  easy  to 
trace  or  describe.  Regarding  both  ends  of  the  period,  we  have 
a fair  amount  of  information,  but  of  the  intervening  thousand 
years  or  more  nothing  adequate  can  be  said.  Certain  points  are 
clear,  but  how  to  fill  the  colossal  period  with  living  interest  is  a 
question.  The  total  amount  of  music  extant  is  small  and  the 
discernible  personalities  pitifully  few.  That  there  was  consid- 
erable musical  life  is  certain  from  after  events,  but  actual  vestiges 
of  it  are  scanty. 

The  Roman  Empire  reached  its  greatest  area  and  prosperity  in  the 
2d  century.  In  the  3d  symptoms  of  decay  began  to  appear,  and  in 
the  4th  and  5th  the  repeated  onsets  of  Goths,  Vandals  and  Huns 
finally  drove  the  seat  of  government  from  Rome  to  Byzantium  (Constan- 
tinople). The  later  6th  century  saw  the  rise  of  Mohammedanism,  which 
in  the  7th  swept  over  Syria,  Egypt  and  Northern  Africa  and  in  the  8th 
reached  Spain.  These  cataclysmic  changes  destroyed  the  continuity  of 
civilized  life  and  thought,  and  interrupted  the  development  of  all  the  fine 
arts.  The  chief  exceptions  were  in  the  Byzantine  Empire  and  in  regions 
under  Moslem  control,  but  in  both  cases  culture  was  more  Oriental  than 
Occidental. 

In  the  midst  of  the  seething  political  turmoil  Christianity  steadily 
advanced.  Under  Constantine  (c.  325)  it  became  the  official  religion  of 
the  Empire.  It  was  then  propagated  into  the  distant  North  and  West, 
especially  among  Teutonic  peoples.  The  Church  became  a mighty  social 
institution.  Adopting  the  Roman  principle  of  unity  in  organization,  it 
aimed  to  arrange  its  officials  in  perfect  gradation  of  authority  under  a 
supreme  pontiff  or  pope,  to  define  ‘orthodoxy’  by  conciliar  enactments 
and  to  suppress  ‘heterodoxy,’  and  to  work  out  a uniform,  prescribed 
liturgy.  All  these  efforts  powerfully  affected  intellectual  and  artistic 
activity  for  centuries.  Only  in  clerical  circles,  such  as  monastic  frater- 
nities, was  continuous  and  peaceful  mental  work  possible.  Cathedrals 
and  religious  houses  were  the  only  repositories  of  learning  and  fountains 
of  education,  so  that  in  the  so-called  Dark  Ages  the  Church  was  the  one 
persistent  and  shining  light. 

What  we  know  of  Christian  music  before  about  1200  is 
involved  in  the  complex  social  and  political  situation.  It 

63 


64 


EARLY  MEDIAEVAL  MUSIC 


is  not  strange  that  the  only  kind  of  music  was  ritual  music  and 
that  all  our  information  comes  through  ecclesiastical  annalists. 

25.  The  First  Christian  Songs.  — Singing  in  public  and  private 
worship  was  a matter  of  course  for  the  early  Christians.  For 
Jewish  converts  this  was  a continuance  of  synagogue  customs, 
but,  since  the  Church  grew  mostly  among  non-Jews,  the  techni- 
cal forms  employed  were  more  Greek  than  Hebrew.  The  use  of 
instruments  was  long  resisted,  because  of  their  association  with 
pagan  sensuality.  In  addition  to  the  Hebrew  Psalms  (in  the 
Greek  version),  the  new  faith  tended  constantly  to  produce  new 
hymns,  at  first  apparently  in  the  form  of  rhapsodies.  From  the 
2d  to  the  4th  centuries  the  foundations  of  the  vast  structure  of 
Christian  hymnody  were  securely  laid,  especially  in  the  epoch- 
making  work  of  certain  Latin  writers. 

The  New  Testament  makes  some  mention  of  the  singing  of  hymns. 
The  earliest  complete  hymn  extant  is  by  Clement  of  Alexandria  (d.  220), 
and  parts  of  canticles  like  the  Gloria  hi  Excelsis  and  the  Te  Deiun  may 
have  been  somewhat  earlier.  By  about  400,  sacred  poems  have  adopted 
accent,  rhyme  and  stanza  in  a way  quite  novd.  For  two  or  three  cen- 
turies thereafter  the  abundance  of  original  hymns  is  a sure  sign  of  the 
cultivation  of  religious  music. 

26.  The  Gregorian  Style.  — From  the  4th  century  the  strong 
accent  upon  unity  of  organization,  fixity  of  creed  and  uniformity 
of  liturgy  led  steadily  to  a demand  for  richness  and  stateliness. 
Costly  edifices  became  common,  ministrants  were  multiplied,  and 
the  whole  ritual  of  worship  tended  to  become  ornate.  This  in- 
volved a new  attention  to  music. 

The  first  centre  of  activity  was  Constantinople,  where  Greek 
music  was  the  established  type  of  artistic  song.  Thus  the  tra- 
dition of  the  ancient  unison  melody  was  handed  on  to  Italy  and 
the  West.  The  evolution  that  followed  is  only  imperfectly 
traceable  in  detail,  but  in  the  end  it  provided  the  mediaeval 
Church  with  a large  and  striking  body  of  melodies,  fitted  to  a 
variety  of  prose  texts  and  even  to  metrical  poetry.  We  must 
suppose  that  these  ritual  melodies  grew  out  of  manifold  experi- 
ments at  different  places,  which  were  only  gradually  wrought 
into  a general  and  uniform  system.  Even  after  the  system  was 
codified,  its  usages  continued  to  accumulate,  and  from  time  to 
time  considerable  modifications  in  style  appeared. 


THE  GREGORIAN  STYLE 


65 


Tradition  attributes  particular  steps  in  the  process  to  certain  popes, 
bishops  and  other  ecclesiastics.  Two  names  have  been  specially  empha- 
sized, Bishop  Ambrose  of  Milan  (d.  397)  and  Pope  Gregory  the  Great 
(d.  604),  the  latter  being  constantly  put  forth  as  the  founder  and  organizer 
of  the  whole  style  called  ‘ Gregorian.1  But  these  traditions,  as  commonly 
stated,  are  at  least  doubtful.  Many  able  scholars  believe  that  the  practical 
completion  of  the  system  was  not  earlier  than  the  8th  century,  perhaps 
under  Gregory  II.  (d.  731)  or  Gregory  III.  (d.  741),  and  that  the  name 
* Gregorian  1 either  came  from  them  or  was  due  to  the  mistaken  zeal  of 
those  who  sought  to  glorify  the  earlier  Gregory. 

It  should  be  remembered  that  the  Gregorian  style  is  the  property  of 
the  Western  or,  more  exactly,  the  Roman  Church.  In  each  of  the  other 
branches  of  the  early  Church  there  were  analogous  developments,  but 
none  of  these,  except  to  a very  limited  extent  that  of  the  Greek  or  Russian 
Church,  has  any  significant  connection  with  the  story  of  modern  music. 

Since  the  Gregorian  style  originated  for  liturgical  reasons,  its 
home  was  the  metropolitan  cathedral  or  the  monastic  chapel, 
whence  it  spread  to  parish  churches  generally.  Being  cultivated 
only  by  ecclesiastics,  to  the  common  people  it  was  remote  and 
abstruse.  Its  direct  influence  upon  the  general  progress  of  music 
was  therefore  limited.  To  some  extent  there  arose  an  antipathy 
between  it  and  secular  music,  which  was  heightened  by  the  fact 
that  church  song  was  always  in  Latin.  In  the  general  evolution 
of  music  it  has  always  remained  a somewhat  peculiar  specialty, 
representing  the  persistence  for  a particular  purpose  of  a style 
which  is  essentially  antique.  Yet  it  must  be  confessed  that  in 
its  ideal  perfection,  as  it  stood  in  the  early  Middle  Ages,  it  was 
a remarkable  example  of  melodic  invention  and  beauty. 

The  Gregorian  style  is  the  only  form  of  music  prescribed  for  use  in 
the  Roman  Church,  though  some  other  styles  have  been  allowed  or  tol- 
erated. It  is  supposed,  however,  that  its  extensive  treasures  represent 
several  stages  of  production,  and  all  are  not  of  equal  validity.  In  a gen- 
eral way,  the  over  600  melodies  belonging  to  the  Mass  and  certain 
other  principal  rites  have  the  greatest  antiquity,  while  the  almost  3000 
belonging  to  the  Breviary  are  later,  and  those  fitted  to  hymns  or  se- 
quences later  still.  But  during  the  Renaissance  the  whole  series  was 
treated  with  much  freedom,  especially  in  the  matter  of  embellishments 
and  ornate  expansions,  so  that  in  the  16th  century,  when  Gregory  XIII. 
and  Sixtus  V.  ordained  the  service-books  since  in  use,  the  style  was  no 
longer  pure.  Recent  enactments  of  Pius  IX.  (1869),  Leo  XIII.  (1883) 
and  especially  Pius  X.  (1903)  have  aimed  not  only  to  enforce  the  rules 
enjoining  the  use  of  Gregorian  music  almost  to  the  exclusion  of  other 
styles,  but  to  correct  many  abuses  in  its  habitual  rendering  and  ulti- 
mately to  recover  and  restore  its  typical  forms.  Especially  under  the 

F 


66 


EARLY  MEDIAEVAL  MUSIC 


lead  of  the  monks  of  Solesmes  (see  sec.  227)  fresh  efforts  are  now 
being  put  forth  to  establish  authentic  texts  and  correct  renderings. 

Gregorian  melodies  vary  considerably  according  to  the  kind 
of  text  for  which  they  are  designed  and  to  the  period  they  rep- 
resent. Some  are  merely  monotones  with  occasional  inflections. 
Some,  as  a rule,  have  but  one  tone  to  the  syllable  and  move  chiefly 
by  diatonic  steps.  Some  abound  in  flowing  figures  to  single 
syllables  and  in  skips,  large  or  small.  But,  whatever  their  form, 
they  plainly  show  a desire  to  find  a real  tonal  embodiment  for 
the  words  and  the  thought.  Only  comparatively  late  came  in 
the  desire  to  make  tonal  patterns  for  their  own  sake.  Being 
designed  primarily  for  prose  texts,  they  have  no  fixed  rhythm  or 
standard  length  of  tones.  Accents  and  quantities  are  derived 
from  the  words,  after  the  manner  of  recitative,  and  in  good  ren- 
dering expressive  flexibility  is  conspicuous.  The  compass  is 
rarely  greater  than  an  octave  and  is  often  much  less.  The  se- 
lection of  tones  conforms  to  scale-types  differing  from  those  of 
secular  and  modern  music  generally  (see  sec.  27).  Properly, 
the  unison  should  not  be  accompanied,  since  harmony  introduces 
a somewhat  foreign  element  and,  unless  very  dexterous,  totally 
changes  the  effect. 

The  term  ‘ Plain-Song,’  often  applied  to  Gregorian  music,  emphasizes 
either  its  lack  of  fixed  rhythm  (in  contrast  with  ‘Measured  Music’),  or 
its  lack  of  harmony  or  part-writing  (in  contrast  with  ‘Figured  Music’ 
or  ‘ Counterpoint  ’). 

27.  Its  Technical  System. — That  the  tone-system  of  the 
Middle  Ages  came  from  that  of  the  Greeks  is  evident,  though 
the  stages  of  evolution  are  not  entirely  clear.  But  probably  the 
formal  system  was  at  first  more  implicit  than  consciously  for- 
mulated. Only  after  Plain-Song  had  reached  a considerable 
development  was  an  effort  made  to  arrange  its  principles  sys- 
tematically. The  basis  chosen  was  a series  of  modes  resem- 
bling the  ‘species’  of  the  Greeks.  Prior  to  about  1000  the 
accepted  modes  numbered  eight,  which  later  came  to  be  known 
by  Greek  names  (oddly  transposed  from  their  ancient  meaning). 
These  modes  fall  into  two  classes — the  ‘authentic’  (straight  or 
primary)  and  the  ‘ plagal  ’ (oblique  or  derived),  the  former  having 
the  ‘final’  (somewhat  analogous  to  keynote)  at  the  bottom 
and  the  ‘ dominant  ’ (chief  reciting-tone)  in  the  middle,  while 


THE  CHURCH  MODES 


67 


the  latter  have  the  final  in  the  middle  and  the  dominant  two  or 
three  steps  above  it.  Strictly  speaking,  each  pair  of  modes  is 
really  one,  the  difference  between  authentic  and  plagal  being  in 
practical  application. 

To  these  earlier  modes  four  more  were  added,  making  twelve  — the 
first  statement  of  the  complete  series  being  by  Glarean  in  1547.  Two 
more  were  proposed,  but  rejected. 


The 

Church  Modes 

Ancient  Names 

1.  Dorian 

D 

E F G 

A*  B C 

D ) 

Phrygian 

2.  Hypodorian 

ABC 

D 

E F*  G 

A 

r 

> 

3.  Phrygian 
4.  Hypophrygian 

B C D 

E 

E 

F G A 
F G A* 

BC*D 

B 

E1 

Dorian 

5.  Lydian 
6.  Hypolydian 

F 

G A B C*  D E 

F > 

Hypolydian 

C D E 

F 

G A*  B C 

; 

7.  Mixolydian 

G 

ABC 

D*  E F 

G ) Hypophrygian 

8.  Hypomixolydian  D E F 

G 

ABC* 

D 

\ 

or  Iastian 

9.  yEolian 

A 

BCD 

E*F  G 

Al 

Hypodorian 

10.  Hypoaeolian 

E F G 

A 

B C*  D 

E 

f 

or  JEolian 

1 . Ionian 

C 

D E F 

G*  A B C } 

Lydian 

12.  Hypoionian 

GAB 

C 

D E*F 

G 

f 

In  each  case  the  final  is  marked  by  a black  letter,  the  dominant  by  an 
asterisk. 

The  essential  difference  between  the  modes  lies  in  the  location  of  the 
short  steps,  as  well  as  of  the  finals  and  dominants. 

While  melodies  in  the  several  modes  were  primarily  intended  to  be 
sung  at  the  pitch  above  indicated,  they  might  be  transposed  to  fit  the 
voice.  The  4 ambitus 1 or  compass  of  a melody  properly  does  not  exceed 
the  octave  of  its  mode  by  more  than  one  step  above  or  below. 

In  strictness,  no  deviations  from  the  above  scales  are  permitted,  but  the 
direct  progression  from  F to  B or  vice  versa  (the  tritone)  was  ruled  out 
as  unsingable,  and,  to  avoid  it,  B 9 was  substituted  for  B wherever  the 
latter  occurred  in  relations  suggesting  the  above  progressions.  Ulti- 
mately, however,  under  the  name  of  4 musica  ficta,’  much  more  extensive 
alterations  of  the  modes  were  practised  (see  sec.  73). 

28.  The  Hexachord-System.  — By  the  1 ith  century,  if  not  be- 
fore, the  whole  series  of  tones  found  useful  for  song  was  reduced 
to  a system  like  the  Complete  System  of  the  Greeks  (see  sec.  20). 
But  it  was  longer  than  the  latter  and  laid  out,  not  in  tetrachords, 
but  in  hexachords  — series  of  tones  standing  in  the  relation  of 
C-D-E-F-G-A.  To  facilitate  practice,  the  syllables  uty  re , mi. 


68 


EARLY  MEDIAEVAL  MUSIC 


The  Hexachord-System 


1. 

2. 

3- 

4- 

5- 

6. 

7- 

"E" 

• 

• 

la 

j 

D" 

la 

sol 

j 

C" 

sol 

fa 

• ^ 

| 

B" 

. 

mi 

• § j 

vd 

B ft 

. 

fa 

1 

i 

A" 

la 

mi 

re 

- 1 

• I 

l - - 

G' 

sol 

re 

ut 

1 

I 

• l 

.<3 

F' 

fa 

ut 

r $— ■ 

E' 

la 

mi 

1 1 

D' 

la 

<3 

sol 

re 

1 

1 

is\ 

1 . 

$ 

1 

Vs  | 

1 1 

1 a 

sol 

fa 

ut 

• ^ 

• ) 

<3 

B' 

mi 

* 

$ 

1 

§ 

•s 

B^ 

fa 

• j 

1 

§ 

A' 

la 

mi 

re 

. 1 

1 

1 

1 

S- 

G 

sol 

re 

ut 

. r 

i 

. J 

F 

fa 

ut 

E 

la 

mi 

D 

sol 

re 

1 

sC 

fa 

ut 

• r 

^ ' 

B 

mi 

. 

A 

re 

• 

r 

ut 

. 

J 


k 

I 


M 

(Tbi 


Hexachords  i,  4 and  7 are  called  hard  because  they  contain  B, 
which  was  distinguished  as  B durum ; hexachords  3 and  6 are  called 
soft  because  they  contain  or  B tnolle  (or  B rotundum ) ; and  hexa- 
chords 2 and  5 are  called  natural  because  they  contain  neither  B nor  Bt\ 


THE  HEXACHORD-SYSTEM 


69 


fa , sol,  la,  were  applied  to  the  successive  tones  of  every  hexachord 
— the  short  step,  therefore,  being  always  mi-fa.  This  consti- 
tuted the  first  form  of  4 solmization,’  of  which  many  new  vari- 
eties and  applications  have  appeared,  all  designed  to  represent 
similar  tone  relations  by  similar  signs. 

These  syllables  were  taken  from  a hymn  to  John  the  Baptist,  the 
traditional  melody  for  which  began  in  each  line  with  the  tone  correspond- 
ing to  its  first  syllable.  The  hymn  reads,  “ Ut  queant  laxis  ^sonare 
fibris  Mira.  gestorum  Tumuli  tuorum,  So/ve  polluti  Labn  reatum, 
Sancte  Johannes.” 

The  system  was  made  up  of  seven  interlocking  hexachords, 
covering  a total  range  of  nearly  three  octaves  — five  tones 
longer  than  the  Greek.  But  two  extra  tones  were  provided  — 
BP  in  addition  to  B,  so  as  to  facilitate  a sort  of  modulation. 
The  tones  of  the  three  octaves  were  designated  respectively 
graves,  acutce  and  superacutce. 

The  lowest  tone  was  called  gamma  and  often  gamma  tit  (whence  the 
term  ‘ gamut 1 for  the  scale  in  general) . Other  tones  were  called  by  their 
letter-names  plus  whatever  syllables  belong  to  them ; as,  for  ‘ middle  C,1 
C solfaut , or,  for  the  uppermost  or  extreme  tone,  E la  (whence  the  liter- 
ary expression  ‘ E la1  for  the  extreme  of  anything). 

Originally  the  tones  were  not  studied  by  means  of  the  syllables,  but 
later  it  became  customary  to  use  the  syllables  of  one  hexachord  as  far  as 
they  served  and  then  to  shift  to  those  of  another,  if  the  melody  went 
beyond.  This  shifting  was  called  ‘mutation,1  and  was  somewhat 
analogous  to  modulation. 

Each  tone  was  felt  to  derive  its  charac- 
ter from  its  place  in  a hexachord,  and  the 
similarity  of  the  hexachords  made  it 
easy  to  imitate  melodic  effects  from  one 
to  the  other.  The  consequences  of  this 
way  of  regarding  tones  and  their  rela- 
tions lasted  long  after  the  system  as 
a whole  was  superseded  by  the  modern 
system  of  octochords. 

To  facilitate  learning  and  using  the 
system,  the  so-called  ‘ Guidonian  Hand 1 
was  invented  — a method  of  assigning 
the  various  tones  to  the  joints  of  the 
hand  so  as  to  be  localized  in  thought. 

This  device  took  its  name  from  Guido 
d' Arezzo  (see  sec.  31),  though  that 
he  invented  it  is  not  likely. 


70 


EARLY  MEDLEVAL  MUSIC 


Specimens  of  Notation  in  Neumes: — FlG.  42. — 10-nth  century;  Fig.  43. — nth 
century;  Fig.  44. — 13th  century;  Figs.  45-46. — 14th  century.  (From  Spanish  MSS.) 


EARLY  NOTATION 


71 

29.  Notation.  — One  of  the  achievements  of  the  early  mediae- 
val period  was  a partial  solution  of  the  problem  of  exactly  rep- 
resenting melodies  by  graphic  signs.  For  the  preservation  and 
circulation  of  music  a notation  is  as  necessary  as  a method  of 
writing  is  for  literature,  but  the  devising  of  a practical  system 
that  should  be  both  precise  and  easy  to  use  was  a process 
extending  over  many  centuries. 

Altogether  the  most  important  of  early  methods  was  that  of 
‘neumes  ’ — shorthand  characters  written  above  the  words  to  be 
sung,  indicating  pictorially  the  rise  and  fall  of  the  voice  in  pitch. 
In  the  early  MSS.,  now  extant,  in  which  neumes  appear  (not 
earlier  than  the  8th  century),  we  find  points  and  dashes  used  for 
monotone  passages,  slanting  strokes  for  upward  steps,  crooks 
pointing  downward  for  downward  steps,  compound  curves  for 
complex  motions,  etc.  In  different  places  and  periods  these 
marks  took  on  various  forms.  Being  a sort  of  cursive  writing, 
they  naturally  varied  with  the  writer  and  the  usage  of  his  time. 
In  general,  however,  they  tended  to  become  more  and  more 
regular  and  precise,  so  as  to  constitute  not  only  a genuine 
record,  but  one  of  fairly  universal  intelligibility.  At  a late 
period  they  were  developed  into  an  ornate  black-letter  form, 
harmonizing  well  with  the  finest  Gothic  script.  Yet  at  the  best 
they  were  somewhat  vague,  serving  chiefly  to  remind  the  singer 
of  what  he  had  learned  by  rote. 

It  has  been  conjectured  that  these  signs  were  akin  to  the  Greek 
‘accents1 — marks  by  which  the  Byzantine  grammarians  indicated 
speech-inflections  ; or,  more  plausibly,  that  they  were  developed  out  of  the 
marks  used  in  Byzantine  service-books  to  indicate  the  usual  form  of  can- 
tillation.  But  the  exact  facts  are  uncertain. 

In  the  10th  century  a great  advance  was  made  by  drawing 
one  or  two  horizontal  lines  across  the  page  to  mark  the  place  of 
certain  tones  or  pitches  and  then  adjusting  the  neumes  to  these 
lines.  From  this  beginning  gradually  developed  the  use  of  a 
‘staff’  — a system  of  four  or  more  such  lines.  To  make  the 
significance  of  these  staff-lines  evident,  one  or  more  of  them 
were  marked  at  the  beginning  with  the  letters  of  the  tones  to 
which  they  were  assigned.  The  letters  most  used  were  F,  C 
and  G,  and  from  the  mediaeval  characters  for  these  were 
gradually  developed  the  modern  ‘clefs.’ 


72 


EARLY  MEDIAEVAL  MUSIC 


The  first  line  to  be  thus  used  was  for  the  tone  F and  was  originally 
colored  red,  and  the  second  was  for  C,  colored  yellow  or  green.  The  use 
of  colored  lines  was  not  long  continued. 


fj*  -c  s |^-|g  q 

FIG.  47.  — Genesis  of  Clefs  from  Gothic  Letters. 


Although  experiments  with  a kind  of  ~ 
staff  began  in  the  9th  century,  its  signifi-  _ 
cant  use  dates  from  the  10th.  G 

The  modern  arrangement  of  treble  and  — 

O p 

bass  staffs  braced  together  is  supposed  to  ^ 
have  come  from  an  old  eleven-line  or  p 
‘great’  staff,  from  which  the  middle  line  is  __ 
omitted  to  facilitate  seeing  to  what  pitch  — 

the  notes  refer.  — 


30.  The  Letter-Names.  — Parallel  with  the  growth  of  the 
neumes  came  the  adoption  of  letter-names  for  tones.  The  idea 
had  already  been  applied  by  the  Greeks  (see  sec.  21),  but  the 
old  Greek  system  was  not  directly  imitated. 

The  Byzantines  seem  to  have  used  the  letters  8,  <f>,  A,  //,  (initials  of 
Dorian,  Phrygian,  Lydian  and  Mixolydian)  for  certain  tones,  and  they 
also  applied  the  letters  a,  (3 , y,  8,  e,  £,  rj  to  the  successive  tones  of  an 
octave-scale  — incorporating  them  also  into  a set  of  solmization-syllables, 
7ra,  (3ov , ya,  81,  xe,  £<d,  vrj.  But  these  usages  had  no  lasting  result. 

The  use  of  Latin  letters  had  many  varieties.  At  one  time 
fifteen  letters  were  employed  (A  to  P)  to  designate  the  tones  of 
two  octaves.  More  satisfactory  was  the  use  of  but  seven  letters 
(A  to  G),  repeated  in  successive  octaves.  The  precise  tone  with 
which  such  names  began  was  not  necessarily  the  tone  now 
called  A,  but  might  be  any  tone  that  was  assumed  as  a start- 
ing-point. In  all  cases  the  series  was  counted  upward  from 
the  gravest  tone  (the  reverse  of  the  Greek  method).  As  the 
system  reached  its  final  form,  the  lowest  G was  added,  and  was 
called  T (gamma')  for  distinction.  (See  table  on  p.  68.) 

As  the  tone-system  developed,  the  need  was  felt  for  both  B and  B^, 
which  were  distinguished  by  differently  shaped  forms,  B being  angular 
(b)  and  called  B durum  or  quadratum,  while  B^7  was  rounded  ({?)  and 
called  B molle  or  rotundum.  From  the  former  ultimately  came  the 
modern  ‘ natural  ’ (ij)  and  also  the  peculiar  German  name  H for  B|^, 


EARLY  MUSICAL  LEADERS 


7 3 


while  from  the  latter  came  the  modern  1 flat  ’ ({?)  and  the  German  name 
B for  Bi?.  The  modern  ‘ sharp  ’ (jt)  is  simply  a variation  of  the 
‘ natural.’ 

It  should  be  added  that  the  letter-notation  was  first  worked  out  for 
instruments  (especially  the  organ)  rather  than  for  song,  but  its  con- 
venience soon  established  it  for  both.  The  first  sure  instances  of  its 
practical  use  are  in  the  writings  of  Notker  (d.  912)  and  of  Hucbald 
(d.  930  ?).  The  ascriptions  of  the  invention  of  the  letter-system  to  Gregory 
the  Great  or  to  Boethius  are  not  well  supported. 

31.  Certain  Pioneers.  — Prior  to  the  nth  century  information 
regarding  individual  musicians  is  extremely  scanty  and  un- 
certain. That  music  was  made  a subject  of  study  in  many 
ecclesiastical  circles  is  clear,  but  the  scope  of  thought  about  it 
was  too  narrow  for  the  display  of  great  originality  or  leader- 
ship. For  convenience  of  reference,  however,  a few  items  are 
here  collected.  (See  also  sec.  36.) 

Many  traditions  point  to  the  early  establishment  of  a school  for  church- 
singers  at  Rome,  but  whether  this  can  be  credited  to  Pope  Sylvester 
(d.  335)  is  doubtful,  or  to  any  other  before  the  5th  century.  By  the  9th 
century,  however,  such  schools  had  become  common,  not  only  in  Italy, 
but  in  France  and  England,  especially  in  connection  with  strong  monas- 
teries or  under  the  care  of  energetic  prelates.  In  France  the  Emperor 
Charlemagne  ( d.  814)  was  especially  interested  in  fostering  them.  From 
about  700,  hints  begin  to  appear  of  the  composition  of  melodies  by  various 
ecclesiastics,  which  are  suggestive  of  the  growing  attention  to  the  art. 

Flaccus  Alcuin  (d.  804),  Abbot  of  Canterbury  and  later  of  Tours,  supplies 
our  earliest  reference  to  the  eight  church  modes ; and  he  is  echoed  some 
decades  later  by  Aurelian  of  Reome. 

Notker  Balbulus  (d.  912),  a high-born  and  cultivated  monk  of  St.  Gall,  is 
noted  for  his  development  of  ‘ sequences  1 as  a part  of  the  musical  treatment  of 
the  Mass.  At  first  these  were  prose  hymns  fitted  to  the  rambling  codas  or 
‘ jubilations’  that  were  added  to  the  ‘Alleluia’  sung  between  the  Epistle 
and  the  Gospel.  Later  the  term  was  extended  to  metrical  hymns,  the  writing 
of  which,  with  appropriate  melodies,  became  common  in  the  later  Middle 
Ages.  (About  1000  sequences  are  now  extant,  but  their  prescribed  use  was 
discontinued  in  1568,  with  four  or  five  exceptions.)  Notker  also  wrote  upon 
the  theory  of  music. 

Hucbald  (d.  930?)  , a monk  of  St.  Amand,  near  Tournai,  was  identified  with 
music  all  his  life.  Several  works  bearing  his  name  are  extant,  though  not  all 
are  surely  his.  These  supply  the  earliest  instance  of  staff-lines  to  indicate 
pitch  (the  words  written  in  the  spaces,  without  note-signs) , use  peculiar  char- 
acters for  the  finals  of  the  modes  (often  called  ‘the  Dacian  notation’),  and 
show  a clear  conception  of  part-singing  in  parallel  motion  (organum} . 

Oddo  (d.  942),  Abbot  of  Cluny  from  927,  also  active  in  music  from  his  youth, 


74  EARLY  MEDIAEVAL  MUSIC 


FIG.  48. — Ancient  Irish 
Harp. 

Fig.  49.  — Ancient 
Rotte,  of  the  lyre  type. 

Fig.  50.  — Welsh  Crwth, 
showing  the  transition  to 
the  viol  type. 

Fig.  51.  — Modern  Hur- 
dy-Gurdy, with  keyboard. 


Fig.  si. 


EARLY  INSTRUMENTS 


75 


is  the  first  writer  to  use  the  letter-names  (A  to  G)  as  is  now  the  custom,  and 
also  the  name  gamma  for  the  tone  below  the  lowest  A.  He  applied  strange 
names  to  the  modes  (including  ‘Dorian’  for  the  first)  and  to  their  character- 
istic tones  or  compass,  implying  a usage  otherwise  quite  unknown.  A tractate 
attributed  to  Berno  of  Reichenau  (d.  1048)  is  also  sometimes  referred  back  to 
Oddo ; it  contains  notable  remarks  upon  some  chromatic  tones  (C#,  E{?,  F2 
besides  Bb). 

Hermannus  Contractus  (d.  1054), a monk  of  Reichenau,  but  trained  at  St.  Gall, 
used  a peculiar  letter-notation  designed  to  clarify  the  neume-system  by  indi- 
cating the  exact  interval  and  the  motion  intended. 

Guido  d’ Arezzo  (d.  1050  ?)  is  the  most  famous  personality  in  the  whole  early 
period.  He  is  now  thought  to  have  been  born  near  Paris  and  educated  there, 
migrating  thence  to  northern  Italy.  He  was  a noted  singer  and  expert 
teacher,  and  in  1026  was  called  to  Rome  by  the  Pope  to  explain  his  system. 
He  died  as  Prior  at  Avellano.  His  renown  led  later  writers  to  assign  various 
discoveries  and  inventions  to  him.  Probably  he  was  the  originator  of  the 
four-line  staff — F red,  C yellow,  A and  E black,  both  lines  and  spaces  being 
used  for  placing  neumes  or  letters  — and  perhaps  of  solmization  (see  sec.  28). 
Whether  he  knew  the  hexachord-system  is  doubtful,  though  this  and  the 
invention  of  the  Guidonian  Hand  have  been  ascribed  to  him. 

32.  Instruments.  — Before  1100  the  history  of  instruments  is 
very  meagre.  At  the  outset,  of  course,  various  ancient  forms, 
both  Greek  and  Roman,  long  continued  in  use.  But  gradually 
these  were  replaced  by  new  forms,  of  various  origin.  Of  the 
process  of  invention  and  improvement  we  are  but  slightly 
informed. 

The  one  partial  exception  is  the  organ,  which  early  became 
notable  because  used  in  churches.  Scattered  references  and 
even  sculptured  representations  begin  as  far  back  as  the  4th 
century,  and  from  the  8th  onward  the  data  rapidly  accumulate, 
especially  in  western  Europe.  The  line  of  derivation  was 
plainly  by  way  of  Byzantium  and  the  Venetians,  and  thence  to 
Germany,  the  Low  Countries  and  England.  The  date  of  the 
first  use  of  the  organ  in  public  worship  is  not  known,  but  was 
not  later  than  the  3d  century,  since  it  was  common  in  Spain  by 
450. 


Of  course,  the  ancient  idea  of  compressing  the  air  by  water  was  early 
replaced  by  the  use  of  bellows.  For  centuries,  however,  the  wind-supply 
was  clumsy  and  inefficient  (as  late  as  950  we  read  of  “70  men”  acting 
as  blowers  in  Winchester  Cathedral).  The  pipes,  made  of  lead,  copper, 
brass,  bronze  or  iron,  ranged  in  number  from  about  8 up  to  15-26  in  the 
4th  century  and  to  400  in  the  10th.  The  compass  was  at  first  only  one 
octave,  and  before  1200  probably  did  not  exceed  2%  octaves  — the  scale 


76  EARLY  MEDIEVAL  MUSIC 

being  purely  diatonic  with  Bb  added.  In  later  examples  the  large  number 
of  pipes  simply  meant  duplication  of  the  tones  for  loudness  or  variety. 
The  pipes  were  made  to  sound  by  depressing  keys  or  levers  not  unlike 
those  used  to-day  for  chime-ringing,  and  they  were  so  far  apart  and  had 
so  much  ‘ dip’  and  resistance  that  they  required  a stroke  from  the  hand 
or  fist  — the  player  being  called  an  ‘organ-beater.’  Variety  of  tone  was 
somehow  secured  in  the  better  specimens  by  the  use  of  ‘stops,’  whose 
quality  might  be  soft  and  sweet  or  harsh  and  stentorian.  The  organ  was 
used  solely  to  support  Gregorian  melodies,  one  tone  at  a time.  There 
was  no  independent  organ  music  till  the  15th  century. 

While  the  organ  was  becoming  a piece  of  church  furniture, 
popular  music  had  recourse  to  various  portable  instruments. 
All  the  northern  peoples  had  poet-singers,  known  as  bards  or 
scalds,  whose  minstrelsy  was  often  of  decided  social  importance. 
The  habit  of  song  spread  more  or  less  among  all  classes,  prob- 
ably always  involving  the  use  of  instruments. 

The  most  characteristic  bardic  instrument  was  the  harp,  which  is  trace- 
able in  very  early  times  in  Germany,  Scandinavia,  France  and  Britain. 
These  old  European  harps  were  triangular,  varying  in  size  within  the 
limits  of  portability,  and  had  from  5 to  15  or  more  strings.  We  know 
nothing  of  methods  of  tuning  or  of  the  exact  method  of  playing. 

Another  striking  form  was  the  ‘ crwth  ’ or  ‘ chrotta  ’ ( later  known  as  the 
‘ rota  ’ or  ‘ rotte  ’),  whose  origin  is  obscure.  It  is  likely  that  it  was  first  a 
rectangular  lyre,  sounded  by  plucking,  but  early  it  appears  as  a rectangular 
viol,  sounded  with  a bow.  It  was  specially  common  among  the  British 
Kelts.  In  one  variety  openings  were  provided  through  the  body  near  the 
top,  so  that  the  hand  could  reach  the  strings  from  behind.  The  number 
of  strings,  either  of  gut  or  metal,  varied  from  three  to  several.  The  earli- 
est literary  reference  to  it  is  by  Fortunatus  of  Poitiers  (d.  609).  This 
instrument  or  its  descendants  finally  coalesced  with  the  Oriental  viols  into 
the  family  of  which  the  violin  is  the  finest  representative.  [The  fact  that 
such  instruments  as  this  had  strings  gave  rise  to  the  name  fidula  (from 
the  Latin y! ides , string),  whence  came  such  variants  as  videle , fidel , vielle 
and  finally  viola , etc.] 

A curious  derivative  of  the  foregoing  was  the  organistrum  or  ‘ hurdy- 
gurdy’ — a rota  sounded  by  a small  wheel  beneath  the  strings.  As  this 
instrument  was  held  horizontally  upon  the  lap,  the  stopping  of  the  strings 
was  managed  by  dampers  pressed  down,  and  these  in  later  times  were 
often  controlled  by  a sort  of  keyboard.  The  number  of  strings  was  usually 
small,  but  the  keys  or  dampers  were  often  many,  giving  a wide  range. 
This  form  still  survives  in  Europe,  notably  in  Savoy. 

The  earliest  appearance  of  indigenous  European  instruments,  like  the 
horn,  the  schalmey  or  ‘shawm,’  the  bagpipe  and  the  glockenspiel  or  ‘ bell- 
piano,’  was  in  the  period  before  us,  but  none  of  these  had  immediate 
importance. 


CHAPTER  V 


POLYPHONY  AND  SECULAR  SONG 

33.  The  Polyphonic  Idea. — The  positive  achievements  of  the 
centuries  following  1200  stand  in  striking  contrast  to  the  timid 
experiments  of  those  before.  From  this  point  onward  the  art 
of  music  becomes  interestingly  interwoven  with  progress  in 
other  fields,  being  a phase  of  the  general  intellectual  awakening 
of  Europe  that  preceded  the  Renaissance. 

Among  the  historic  conditions  to  be  borne  in  mind  are  (0)  the  break- 
ing up  of  Charlemagne’s  empire  in  the  9th  century,  with  the  gradual  dis- 
integration of  the  feudal  social  system  ; (b)  the  Crusades  in  the  12th  and 
13th  centuries,  with  their  immense  stimulus  of  thought  and  activity, 
especially  among  the  lower  classes ; and  (c)  the  new  life  in  the  fine  arts 
generally,  as  shown  by  the  rise  of  Gothic  architecture  about  the  12th 
century  and  of  Italian  painting  in  the  13th. 

The  distinctive  feature  of  the  period  in  music  was  a profound 
alteration  in  the  aim  of  composition.  In  Greek  music  and  its 
successor,  the  Gregorian  style,  the  one  desire  was  for  a single 
melodic  outline  to  enforce  and  beautify  a verbal  text.  All 
music  was  a specialized  outgrowth  or  derivative  of  poetic  speech. 
A new  era  came  in  when  it  was  seen  that  music  might  have 
beauty  and  meaning  more  or  less  independent  of  its  words,  be- 
ing built  up  into  a fabric  or  edifice  of  tones  by  massing  and 
interweaving  two  or  more  voice-parts  like  strands  or  threads. 

The  transition  to  this  new  idea  involved  two  lines  of  effort, 
which  for  convenience  may  be  taken  up  separately.  These 
were  ( a ) the  reduction  of  melodies  to  regular  rhythmic  form, 
with  such  accentual  and  durational  values  of  the  tones  that 
their  motions  could  be  accurately  measured  and  mutually  ad- 
justed, and  (&)  the  discovery  of  ways  in  which  melodies  could 
be  simultaneously  combined  so  as  to  be  concordant,  or,  if  dis- 
cordant, still  satisfactory  and  effective.  The  former  effort  led 
to  a theory  of  ‘ time,’  the  latter  to  a theory  of  ‘ counterpoint,’ 
and  the  two  were  mutually  interdependent  at  every  point. 

77 


78 


POLYPHONY  AND  SECULAR  SONG 


34.  Time  and  its  Notation. — That  the  early  Plain-Song  had  a 
general  rhythm,  often  approaching  regularity,  was  a matter  of 
course,  since  all  prose  has  some  rhythm.  But  strict  rhythm 
was  for  Gregorian  melodies  incidental  and  even  objectionable. 
Music,  however,  could  not  avoid  being  affected  by  the  rhythms 
and  metres  of  poetry,  in  which  accent  and  time-values  were 
systematized.  The  most  plausible  theory  of  the  appearance  of 
a time-system  in  music  is  that  which  attributes  it  to  cer- 
tain verse-schemes  that  were  adopted  as  patterns  for  musical 
phrases. 

The  first  clear  reference  that  we  have  to  this  subject  (13th 
century)  assumes  the  existence  of  equal  measures,  implying  a 
sense  of  strict  rhythm.  It  presents  the  notion  that  triple 
rhythm  is  better  than  duple,  and  in  the  subdivision  of  the  parts, 
a long  note  is  assumed  to  be  equal  to  three  shorter  ones  unless 
the  contrary  is  specified  — all  different  from  our  present  view. 
With  these  fundamental  conceptions  of  time,  what  was  called 
Mensural  or  Measured  Music  rapidly  developed  into  numerous 
metric  patterns. 

Tempus  perfectum  was  the  term  for  triple  rhythm  and  tempus  imper- 
fectum  for  duple,  while  prolatio  major  indicated  a triple  division  of  long 
notes  and  prolatio  minor  a duple  division.  This  exaltation  of  triple  types 
may  have  been  due  to  various  causes  — it  was  often  associated  with  the 
theological  doctrine  of  the  Trinity ! 

Immediately  arose  the  need  for  a notation  corresponding 
to  these  ideas.  The  old  neumes  were  still  used  and  also  the 
square  characters  derived  from  them.  The  virga ,y  , and  the 
punctum , % , had  passed  into  the  longa , mlf  and  the  brevis , H. 
The  former  now  came  to  be  the  standard  long  note,  the  latter 
the  standard  short  note.  One  longa  in  major  prolation  was 
equal  to  three  breves,  in  minor  prolation  to  two.  The  system 
of  notes  was  further  increased  by  the  maxima , ^ (double  longa) 
and  the  semibrevis , ♦ (half-brevis),  and  after  1300  by  further 
notes  of  less  value — the  minima , *,  semiminima , * , and  finally 

the  fusa,  \ and  semifusa , tf . 

^ 1/ 

These  notes  were  written  at  first  as  above,  with  solid  or  black  heads. 
In  the  15th  century  open  or  white  heads  appear,  and  in  the  16th  they 
begin  to  be  rounded.  The  derivation  of  the  modern  forms  is  evident : — 


TIME  AND  ITS  NOTATION 


79 


maxima  longa 

brevis 

semibrevis 

minima 

semiminima 

/usa 

Mediaeval,  ^ 

O 

9 

1 

♦ 

Li 

O 

0-^ 

O ♦ 

$ or  b 

Modern, 

Ifil  ' 

breve 

GL 

semibreve 

P 

1 

minim 

r 

crotchet 

? 

1/ 

quaver 

Besides  these  simple  notes  various  compound  characters,  called  1 ligatures,’ 
were  used  to  denote  conventional  note-groups. 

For  a time,  in  the  transition  from  black  to  white  notes,  small  distinctions 
of  value  were  indicated  by  using  some  red  notes  or  by  retaining  black 
heads  for  some  notes  while  the  rest  were  white.  These  niceties  of  nota- 
tion were  comprehended  under  the  general  term  ‘ color,’  the  need  for  which 
ceased  in  the  16th  century. 

Corresponding  with  the  various  notes  were  equivalent  pauses  or  rests. 

Signs  were  early  placed  at  the  beginning  of  the  staff  to  show 
the  kind  of  rhythm  and  the  prolation  intended.  Tempus  per- 
fectum  was  marked  by  a circle,  O,  tempus  imperfectum  by  a 
half-circle,  C ; if  the  prolation  was  minor,  a dot  was  placed  within 
these,  O or  G.  Not  until  about  1600  were  the  measures  regu- 
larly marked  off,  and  then  often  only  by  a sort  of  check-mark  — 
the  rudiment  of  the  modern  bar. 

The  sign  for  imperfect  time  or  duple  rhythm  survives  in  

the  modern  time-signatures  for  quadruple  and  duple  — ^ — ^7 — 
rhythm  : — 

It  should  be  added  that  the  growth  of  notation  was  much  in- 
fluenced by  the  use  of  various  forms  of  ‘ tablature  ’ — special 
notations  devised  for  certain  instruments  (see  sec.  52). 

The  first  traces  of  attention  to  time-problems  occur  in  the  10th  and 
nth  centuries,  long  before  we  have  a statement  of  the  mensural  system 
in  full. 

35.  Organum,  Discant  and  Measured  Music.  — The  germ  of 
counterpoint  lay  in  experiments  with  combining  two  voices. 
Even  the  Greeks  had  a special  term,  ‘ magadizing  ’ (from  the  in- 
strument, the  magadis , on  which  octaves  could  be  played),  for 
the  singing  together  of  two  voices  in  octaves ; and  such  melodic 
duplication  was  felt  by  them  and  by  their  successors  to  differ 
essentially  from  pure  unison.  So  in  the  Middle  Ages  another 
step  was  taken  by  adding  to  a given  melody  what  was  called  an 
organum  (from  the  instrument  on  which  it  was  possible),  which 


8o 


POLYPHONY  AND  SECULAR  SONG 


was  a series  of  tones  a fifth  higher  or  a fourth  lower.  The 
resulting  succession  of  parallels  — atrocious  to  modern  taste  — 
was  slightly  interfered  with  by  the  limitations  of  the  scales 
available  and  by  other  considerations,  so  that  gradually  other 
consonances  were  recognized  and  also  the  value  of  some  con- 
trary motion.  These  experiments  were  at  first  confined  to  but 
two  voices,  the  one  with  a Plain-Song  melody  to  which  the 
other  added  consonances  in  either  similar  or  contrary  motion ; 
but  occasionally  one  or  two  more  voices  were  added  to  these,  thus 
preparing  the  way  for  some  apprehension  of  harmony  proper. 
For  the  union  of  two  voices  the  terms  ‘ diaphony  ’ or  ‘discant’  (or 
‘descant’)  were  used.  It  appears  that  experiments  of  this  sort 
were  freely  made  before  1200  and  were  not  unknown  before 
1000. 

But  much  progress  with  discant  was  possible  only  through 
some  recognition  of  accent  and  stress  and  of  the  groupings  of 
tones  that  they  generate.  When  not  under  the  accent,  occa- 
sional dissonances  were  permitted  among  the  prevailing  con- 
sonances, and  even  some  chromatic  alterations  of  the  modes  to 
avoid  the  suggestion  of  the  tritone.  For  a time  thirds  and 
sixths  were  classed  as  dissonances,  but  they  were  soon  per- 
mitted if  duly  supported  by  consonances.  Gradually  a number 
of  rules  of  voice-leading  became  fixed,  which  have  remained  in 
force  ever  since.  Combined  with  these  were  certain  recognized 
time-schemes  for  phrases  and  sections  that  were  thought  to  be 
typical.  It  is  likely  that  the  groping  after  principles  of  organi- 
zation in  time  and  accent  had  much  to  do  with  determining 
those  of  voice-part  writing. 

Among  these  tentative  efforts  certain  special  forms  or  methods  of  writ- 
ing were  favored,  such  as  fitting  a flowing  melody  to  a reiterated  burden 
or  drone-bass,  or  arbitrarily  uniting  two  melodies  not  originally  meant  to 
go  together,  or  devising  a second  part  by  mere  extemporization.  The 
latter  process  may  explain  some  of  the  seemingly  lawless  handling  of 
added  voices.  The  use  of  a burden  gave  obvious  unity  and  a degree  of 
‘form.’  The  forced  union  of  incongruous  melodies  may  have  suggested 
the  ‘ rondel  ’ or  ‘ rota.’  These  latter  terms  sometimes  referred  to  a brief 
three-part  song  fitted  to  a poem  of  the  rondeau  type,  sometimes  to  a three- 
part  ‘round’  in  which  all  the  voices  began  together  and  proceeded  by 
exchanging  phrases,  and  in  one  famous  instance  to  a true  four-part  canon 
which  rests  on  a brief  two-part  canonic  burden  that  is  repeated  over  and 
over  while  the  chief  canon  proceeds. 


THE  RISE  OF  POLYPHONY 


81 


This  last  instance  is  the  noted  piece,  “ Sumer  is  icumen  in,”  found  in  a 
MS.  in  the  British  Museum,  which  on  internal  evidence  is  thought  to  date 
from  between  1225  and  1240,  and  to  have  emanated  from  Reading  Abbey 
(35  miles  west  of  London).  The  principal  words  celebrate  the  spring  as 
follows : — 

“ Sumer  is  icumen  in,  Lhude  sing  cuccu; 

Groweth  sed  and  bloweth  med,  And  springth  the  wode  nu; 

Awe  bleteth  after  lomb,  Lhouth  after  calve  cu; 

Bulluc  sterteth,  bucke  verteth,  Murie  sing  cuccu. 

Wei  singes  thu  cuccu;  Ne  swik  thu  naver  nu.”  — 

though  there  are  also  Latin  words — a hymn  to  the  Virgin.  The  theme 
or  subject  is  a flowing  and  joyous  melody,  sung  in  strict  imitation  (canon 
at  the  unison)  by  four  equal  voices  entering  at  intervals  of  four  measures. 
The  burden  swings  monotonously  back  and  forth  between  tonic  and  domi- 
nant harmony. 

The  questions  raised  by  this  specimen  are  not  readily  answered.  Its 
probable  date  and  place  are  not  easily  reconciled  with  its  strictly  modern 
scale  and  form,  its  secular  charm,  and  its  almost  flawless  part-writing. 
Perhaps  it  is  a union  of  ecclesiastical  counterpoint  with  a theme  and  a 
style  belonging  to  Trouvere  music  (see  sec.  39). 

36-  Literature  about  Music.  — While  until  about  1400  we  do 
not  find  much  actual  composition  above  the  level  of  experiment, 
the  amount  of  literary  discussion  of  music  is  significant.  The 
topics  most  treated  are  naturally  the  practical  handling  of 
Plain-Song,  the  problems  of  notation  and  of  Mensural  Music, 
with  questions  about  consonance  and  the  rudiments  of  counter- 
point. Almost  every  one  of  the  writers  known  to  us  by  name 
was  an  ecclesiastic,  especially  of  the  Benedictine  Order.  A 
large  number  of  works,  however,  are  anonymous  and  not 
certainly  attributable  as  to  either  country  or  exact  period. 

As  will  be  seen  from  the  following  table,  the  geographical  distribution  of 
the  writers  that  can  be  identified  changes  about  1100.  Before  then  the 
greater  number  belong  to  Germany  or  parts  of  France  — roughly  speak- 
ing, to  the  valleys  of  the  Rhine  and  the  Rhone.  After  that  time  the 
greater  number  are  from  northern  France  or  England,  with  Germany 
again  and  finally  Italy  added  in  the  14th  century.  From  the  12th  century 
Spain  is  more  important  than  the  table  indicates,  since  most  of  the  extant 
works  there  are  anonymous.  A glance  at  the  places  indicated  will  show 
what  localities  were  musically  most  active. 

For  convenience,  all  the  chief  writers  up  to  the  appearance  of  printed 
books  are  here  included,  beginning  with  the  pioneers,  some  of  whom  have 
already  been  named,  and  crossing  over  into  the  15th  century. 

Only  a few  brief  notes  can  here  be  made  upon  the  many  names  in  this 
table. 


G 


82 


POLYPHONY  AND  SECULAR  SONG 


MEDIAEVAL  WRITERS 


83 


3: 

CO 


o 

£ 

Ci 

N 

in 

.s 

'S 

‘So 


<3° 

8 O 

^ f 

ci 

u 

<u 


U.  U 

«'C 

>•§ 
0 <i> 

o ^ 


<3  S Q <3 


£ g £ 

^ k <3 
ci 

3 ^ 

CX  0\ 


^ d 


8 b § 
H SS 

t U a 

c ^ ii  ^ 

— o 0 <u 

o 3 


43  <1 


to 

33 


’ u C 3 
JO  C = 'g  _ 

8 "3  £ 2.5S 

.£  bo  3 3 — 7? 

2DC<fc^ 


a 


1 

o is 

00  42 


§0 


? *s 


o 

VO 

CO 


<u 

tJO 

3 

W 


o 

bJO 

3 

E 


S' 


b & 

^*§ 
O ** 

^ 0 .b 

■^cS 


to 

< 


& 


.«-5  .«•} 

£ £ 

<2  <3 


rv5  t- 
^ J2  trt 

Oi  CO 
. • N <u 

pq 


rt  O 
n o 
« 3 


§ <u 


« U 

rt  <u 


.§  § O 


- Ch 


3 CO  3 


4=flug2«o 

cS  a;  CI  <U  S •«-! 

O &h  Oh  E w > 


^T3 

vO  3 

(N  pj 


a 


•g  •§>*  s 

5>  « Q Q 

Cj  « JT  ,£» 

H E 

/-^H  Cl 

0-.  cn  cn  to  t« 

ici'C  T i 3 

3 3—  U 


.2 

3 o 

T§ 

D 


73  s 


o 


u 2 'q  1 

’gS  's 

e 

E^  < 


3 

1 

<§ 


0) 

Vh 

rt 

S 

£ E 


d 

toH 

o fl 

£ I 

O 00 


£ 

o 


^o  £ 

VO  Q 
co^ 


I 

^ o 
£^23  <u 
o 3 ”£ 

co  ci  ii 

copn  ~ 

<U  3 

g^H'S 

f>E  g.s 

p (U 

OE'^H 


4) 

> 

O ^ 

f!§^ 


ci 

.3 

tJO 

3 

to 


3 

O -7 


— o 


JUh 


to 

O 

33 

3 

ci 

E 


3: 

LO 


84 


POLYPHONY  AND  SECULAR  SONG 


Among  the  many  elucidations  of,  or  commentaries  upon,  Guido,  that  of 
Aribo  of  Freising  (d.  1078)  is  specially  valuable  because  of  the  nearness 
of  date. 

In  the  prolix  work  of  Joannes  Presbyter  (late  nth  century)  is  a vocabu- 
lary of  terms  — the  earliest  known. 

Johannes  Cotton,  probably  of  English  birth,  was  a singing-teacher  in  a 
monastery  near  Brussels.  His  treatise  is  noteworthy  for  its  painstaking  de- 
scription of  the  harmonic  ideas  of  his  day,  especially  as  to  organum  and 
discant.  He  refers  to  the  hexachord-system,  but  does  not  know  about 
measured  music. 

The  other  12th-century  writers  are  not  specially  important,  except  that 
the  English  iElrede  of  Rivaulx  (d.  1166)  and  John  of  Salisbury  (d.  c.  1180) 
imply  that  rather  free  part-singing  was  being  attempted,  but  without  system, 
while  the  writer  known  as  ‘ Aristotle  ’ is  allied  to  the  later  mensuralists  in  his 
desire  to  classify  intervals  for  contrapuntal  use,  though  in  his  list  of  disso- 
nances he  counts  the  sixths  as  best,  the  thirds  as  medium,  and  the  tritone  and 
the  seconds  as  worst. 

All  works  after  1200  indicate  the  advance  of  thought  regarding  both  the 
classification  of  intervals  and  the  time-relations  of  part-writing.  [Three  strik- 
ing cases  of  identical  names  are  associated  with  works  that  are  diverse  in 
matter  or  period.  The  difficulty  is  roughly  solved  by  enumerating  two  Gar- 
landias,  two  Francos,  and  two  Johannes  de  Muris.] 

The  first  Garlandia  shows  a clear  insight  into  systematic  counterpoint, 
including  even  the  principle  of  imitation  between  the  voices.  He,  like  his 
successors,  reckons  the  thirds  as  consonances,  is  feeling  his  way  towards  a 
time-system,  and  uses  some  chromatic  tones  to  soften  harsh  progressions. 

Franco  of  Cologne  (though  sadly  confused  with  Franco  of  Paris)  is  appar- 
ently the  first  to  give  full  expression  to  the  theories  of  intervals  and  of  time 
that  were  becoming  generally  accepted  by  his  time.  His  great  treatise  on 
Measured  Music  is  one  of  the  most  famous  and  useful  in  the  whole  period 
before  the  15th  century. 

Hieronymus  de  Moravia,  a Parisian  monk,  makes  clear  the  opposition 
between  the  popular  instinct  for  duple  rhythms  and  the  arbitrary  ruling  of  the 
mensuralists  in  favor  of  triple  ; while  Marchetto  di  Padua,  somewhat  later,  ven- 
tures to  assert  the  superiority  of  duple  forms.  The  latter  also  argues  against 
the  expression  musica  falsa  for  chromatic  alterations  of  the  modes,  claiming 
them  to  be  legitimate  and  necessary. 

For  some  reason  English  musicians  and  those  in  touch  with  them  seem  to 
have  been  more  ready  than  others  to  give  up  the  Pythagorean  tuning  of  the 
thirds  (major  = ||  and  minor  = ff)  in  favor  of  the  modern  tuning  (major  = £, 
minor  = f),  with  its  utility  in  the  forming  of  triads.  Walter  Odington  (d.  after 
1330),  writing  about  1300,  argues  strongly  for  this  latter  view,  and  was  prob- 
ably the  first  to  emphasize  the  major  triad  as  a real  three-part  consonance. 
He  also  is  the  first  to  mention  the  minim  (f5*). 

The  most  significant  theorists  in  the  14th  century  were  Johannes  de 
Muris  (two  writers)  and  Philippe  de  Vitry.  The  first  Johannes  de  Muris, 
‘the  Norman,’  trained  at  Oxford,  is  now  distinguished  from  the  second,  ‘of 
France,’  who  from  1321  was  teacher  and  later  rector  at  the  Sorbonne.  The 


MEDIEVAL  WRITERS 


85 


former  supplies  the  most  extensive  of  mediaeval  treatises,  treating  of  intervals, 
consonances  and  dissonances,  ancient  music,  the  church  modes,  solmization, 
measured  music  and  discant,  all  regarded  with  decided  conservatism.  The 
latter,  represented  by  several  works,  is  much  more  radical,  and,  like  Philippe 
de  Vitry,  advocates  counterpoint  for  several  voices,  with  free  use  of  chromatics 
and  rhythmic  variety.  Indeed,  it  is  now  queried  whether  the  * Ars  nova  ’ 
ascribed  to  Philippe  de  Vitry  does  not  belong  to  this  second  Johannes 
de  Muris. 

Arabic  writing  upon  musical  topics  was  voluminous  during  the  mediaeval 
period.  The  earliest  theoretical  writer  was  Chalil  (d.  776),  followed  in  the 
9th  and  10th  centuries  by  writers  like  al-Kindi  (d.  862)  and  the  illustrious 
al-Farabi  (d.  c.  950),  the  latter  of  whom  was  a diligent  student  of  Greek 
authorities.  Much  later,  especially  in  the  14th  century,  came  a host  of 
writers  under  Persian  influence,  prominent  among  whom  were  Saffieddin 
and  al-Khadir.  In  their  writings  there  seems  to  be  a mingling  of  some 
ideas  derived  from  Arabian  tradition  with  a large  amount  from  other 
sources.  How  these  elements  are  to  be  disentangled  is  not  clear.  The 
doctrine  of  the  ‘messel1  (proportion  or  measure),  expounded  by  Mahmud 
Shirasi  (d.  1315)  and  others,  was  a noteworthy  effort  to  systemize  the 
mathematics  of  intervals,  including  the  earliest-known  recognition  of  both 
major  and  minor  thirds  and  sixths  as  consonances.  Among  the  discus- 
sions of  aesthetics  mention  may  be  made  of  a striking  essay  by  al-Ghazzali 
(d.  1 1 13)  on  the  relation  of  music  to  religious  emotion. 


37.  Secular  Song. — At  just  the  period  when  the  scholastic 
music  of  the  Church  was  clumsily  struggling  with  the  problem 
of  polyphony,  came  the  first  signal  outcroppings  of  secular 
song  as  an  equally  important  part  of  musical  development. 
These  instinctive  efforts  of  the  popular  spirit  to  find  an  outlet 
in  music,  though  without  far-reaching  purpose,  achieved  some 
striking  immediate  results  and  at  length  contributed  much  to 
the  enrichment  of  the  art. 

For  convenience,  the  successive  movements  are  treated  summarily, 
though  the  last  of  them  runs  over  into  the  16th  century. 

38.  The  Troubadours.  — The  first  definite  movement  occurred 
in  Provence  (now  southeastern  France),  probably  soon  after 
1 100.  This  was  presently  paralleled  in  northern  France  by  a 
similar,  though  distinct,  movement.  The  first  was  that  of  the 
Troubadours,  the  second,  of  the  Trouveres  (both  words  meaning 
‘ finders  ’ or  ‘ inventors  ’).  As  will  be  seen,  these  were  poet-singers, 
at  first  wholly  of  the  upper  or  wealthy  class,  and  their  impulse 
was  more  literary  than  musical.  The  musical  consequences  of 
their  work  appeared  later. 


86 


POLYPHONY  AND  SECULAR  SONG 


The  geographical  range  of  the  Troubadours  was  from  northern  Spain 
eastward  to  Venice,  and  from  the  Mediterranean  northward  in  France  to 
Lyons  and  Poitiers.  The  headquarters  was  in  the  basin  of  the  Garonne 
and  the  lower  valley  of  the  Rhone  — the  region  of  which  Toulouse  is  the 
centre. 

The  first  celebrated  name  among  the  Troubadours  is  that  of  William, 
Count  of  Poitiers  (d.  1127),  and  conspicuous  later  were  princes  like  Alfonso  II. 
of  Aragon  (d.  1196),  Richard  I.  of  England  (d.  1199),  and  Thibaut  IV.  of 
Navarre  (d.  1253),  with  Queen  Eleanor  of  France,  later  of  England  (d.  1204), 
not  to  speak  of  scores  of  others  with  every  kind  of  lordly  title.  At  the 
outset,  then,  the  movement  was  confined  to  the  leisurely  and  elegant  class, 
though  its  influence  speedily  spread  to  other  classes. 

In  a peculiar  sense  the  songs  of  the  Troubadours  embodied 
one  side  of  the  idea  of  chivalry  or  knightliness.  They  espe- 
cially expressed  the  sentiment  of  love,  but  the  form  of  love 
chiefly  magnified  was  one  almost  impossible  for  modern  thought 
to  accept  as  wholesome,  since  it  was  the  praise  and  even  adora- 
tion of  married  women  by  others  than  their  husbands.  While 
doubtless  this  notion  was  fantastic  and  often  ran  to  lawless 
extremes,  yet  it  was  by  no  means  essentially  or  inevitably  base. 
It  was  the  effort  of  an  age  not  fully  emerged  from  barbarism 
to  glorify  the  attraction  of  sex  and  even  to  etherealize  it.  It 
exalted  womanhood  as  perhaps  never  before,  and  it  unlocked 
the  door  of  literary  expression  for  intense  feeling  of  every  kind. 
The  style  of  poetry  thus  generated  was  not  only  sentimentally 
extravagant,  but  often  stilted  and  manneristic. 

The  themes  most  chosen  were  the  beauty  and  worth  of  the  lady  to 
whom  the  knight  gave  his  homage,  the  exploits  of  gallantry,  labor  or 
peril  on  her  behalf,  the  joy  of  meeting  or  the  pain  of  absence,  the  many 
phantasies  and  yearnings  of  the  lover,  the  look  of  nature  in  all  its  aspects 
to  the  eye  that  love  had  quickened,  and  sometimes  flights  of  martial, 
heroic  or  even  religious  ecstasy. 

Certain  forms  were  favorites,  like  the  canson  or  stanza-song  in  general, 
the  tenso  or  dialogue,  the  sirvente  or  narrative,  with  many  special  varie- 
ties, like  the  alba  or  morning-song,  the  serena  or  evening-song,  the 
balada  or  clance-song,  the  planh  or  complaint,  etc.  Great  ingenuity  was 
shown  in  the  elaboration  of  curious  verse-forms,  with  reiterated  rhymes, 
studied  effects  in  assonance  and  the  like,  and  highly  complicated  stanzas. 
Yet,  in  spite  of  the  tendency  to  mere  technique,  the  lyric  impulse  was  so 
strong  that  in  these  efforts  was  the  source  of  the  entire  modern  art  of 
lyric  verse.  The  impetus  thus  given  lasted  long  after  the  Troubadour 
period  ended,  explaining  many  a feature  of  poetry  in  Italy,  France,  Spain 
and  England.  In  Italy,  for  example,  the  style  of  Dante  (d.  1321)  and  of 
Petrarch  (d.  1374)  is  clearly  based  on  Provempal  originals. 


THE  TROUBADOURS 


s; 


With  the  verse-making  impulse  ran  a musical  one.  The 
Troubadour  songs  were  meant  to  be  sung,  not  recited  or  read. 
Probably  some  of  them  were  written  for  popular  airs  already  in 
use,  but  most  of  them  necessitated  new  melodies.  The  forms 
chosen  were  essentially  different  from  the  traditional  Plain- 
Song.  They  show  a fairly  clear  sense  of  tonality  as  now 
understood,  often  in  the  major  mode.  Their  phrases  are  well 
defined,  corresponding  to  the  lines  of  the  words,  usually  with 
but  one  tone  to  a syllable,  ending  with  a cadence,  and  based 
upon  a regular  accentual  rhythm.  Many  airs,  therefore,  have 
attractiveness  to  the  modern  ear.  Their  historic  importance  is 
obvious.  Wherever  this  minstrelsy  penetrated,  it  fixed  a taste 
for  styles  quite  diverse  from  that  of  the  Church,  one  close  to  the 
feeling  of  the  common  people  and  apt  for  their  use.  It  thus 
prepared  the  way  for  the  transformation  of  scholastic  music  in 
the  16th  century.  In  viewing  the  musical  situation  prior  to 
1500  this  factor  cannot  be  neglected. 

It  is  not  clear  what  was  the  source  of  the  musical  side  of  the  Trouba- 
dour song.  It  has  been  thought  that  in  Provence  and  northern  Italy 
traditions  of  the  ancient  popular  song  of  the  Romans  may  have  lingered. 
Keltic  influences  were  strong  in  Provence,  and  the  Kelts  have  always  been 
musical.  It  is  likely,  too,  that  something  came  from  the  experiences  of 
the  Crusaders,  possibly  hints  from  Saracenic  or  Byzantine  songs  or  from 
reports  of  the  Moorish  culture  in  Spain. 

The  Troubadours  made  increasing  use  of  ‘joglars’  or  ‘jon- 
gleurs,’ singers  or  players  who  might  or  might  not  have  indepen- 
dent poetic  genius.  These  helpers  were  of  various  classes  and 
served  for  pay.  Through  them  the  scope  of  the  movement  was 
greatly  extended,  so  that  it  ultimately  reached  the  lower  classes 
generally.  Thus  a style  that  was  at  first  aristocratic  became 
truly  popular. 

Probably  the  jongleurs  were  often  drawn  from  the  itinerant  mounte- 
banks that  were  numerous  in  southern  and  western  Europe.  These 
artistic  ‘ tramps 1 had  varied  accomplishments,  like  singing,  dancing, 
gymnastic  and  sleight-of-hand  tricks,  etc.  — as  their  English  names, 
‘juggler’  and  ‘gleeman,’  signify.  They  thrived  on  the  popular  craving 
for  diversion  at  a time  when  diversions  were  few. 

Incidentally,  the  use  of  hired  assistants  served  to  differentiate  a class 
who  made  music  a business  or  occupation  — of  which  curious  con- 
sequences have  continued  ever  since. 

Both  poets  and  singers  made  use  of  portable  instruments. 


88 


POLYPHONY  AND  SECULAR  SONG 


especially  the  harp,  lute  and  viol,  though  none  of  these  was  yet 
technically  advanced.  We  do  not  know  precisely  how  accom- 
paniments were  played,  whether  giving  detached  tones  or  chords 
merely  to  sustain  the  voice,  or  doubling  the  melody  of  the  song 
itself,  or  here  and  there  giving  an  additional  melody,  or  supply- 
ing enrichment  by  preludes,  interludes  and  cadenzas.  But  we 
may  infer  that  the  fresh  genius  that  expressed  itself  in  words 
and  song  was  not  wanting  in  the  accompaniment. 

The  period  of  the  Troubadours  proper  came  to  an  end  in  the  13th 
century,  primarily  because  of  the  political  turmoils  over  the  Albigensian 
heresy  — that  strange  revolt  against  the  abuses  and  the  autocracy  of  the 
Church  which  reached  such  proportions  about  1200  that  Innocent  III.  pro- 
claimed a crusade  against  it.  From  1208  to  1220  a furious  war  ensued, 
into  which  most  of  the  nobles  of  southern  France  were  drawn  in  self- 
defense,  whether  or  not  interested  in  Albigensian  views,  and  which 
resulted  in  the  total  spoliation  of  the  country.  This  practically  destroyed 
the  wealthy  class  that  sustained  the  Troubadours  and  ruined  the  entire 
civilization  of  which  they  were  a part.  By  the  middle  of  the  13th  cen- 
tury what  traces  remained  of  literary  life  in  Provence  and  Languedoc 
had  begun  to  be  absorbed  into  the  rising  current  of  French  literature 
proper. 

39.  The  Trouveres. — The  Trouveres  of  northern  France 
seem  to  have  caught  their  first  inspiration  from  the  Trouba- 
dours and  to  have  imitated  them  largely  in  choice  of  themes, 
treatment  and  general  spirit.  But  the  differences  were  also 
notable.  The  Trouveres,  for  example,  loved  to  compile  and  set 
forth  the  rich  treasures  of  legend  in  Brittany  and  Normandy,  to 
accumulate  the  myths  of  Charlemagne  and  other  traditional 
heroes,  and  to  exalt  the  romantic  tales  of  the  Crusades.  The 
language  of  the  north  was  not  so  varied  and  musical  as  that  of 
Provence,  and  the  warmth  of  passion  and  vivacity  of  fancy 
were  also  slighter.  There  was  less  organization  of  effort 
among  the  Trouvere  poets,  less  competition  among  themselves 
for  technical  approbation,  and  less  class-exclusiveness.  Around 
them,  too,  were  many  strong  monasteries  and  abbeys,  where 
ecclesiastics  were  leaders  in  literature  and  art,  and  where  poetry 
and  music  had  long  been  valued  in  religious  worship.  Natu- 
rally, then,  the  Trouvere  poetry  often  turned  to  sacred  themes, 
and  its  melodies  were  not  always  sharply  different  from  those 
of  the  Church.  From  this  it  followed  that  while  the  Trouba- 
dours stimulated  poetic  literature  in  general  without  much 


THE  TROUVERES 


89 


direct  musical  effect,  the  Trouveres  helped  to  shape  and  direct 
the  great  school  of  composition  in  Flanders  and  England  that 
became  conspicuous  after  1400  (see  sec.  43). 

The  region  of  the  Trouveres  included  all  of  northern  France  from 
Tours  and  Angers  on  the  Loire  to  Arras  in  the  north  and  also  down  the 
valley  of  the  Moselle  to  the  Rhine.  Since  the  interchange  between 
France  and  England  was  close,  the  art  spread  readily  across  the  Channel. 
Paris  was  a natural  centre,  as  it  had  been  the  capital  of  the  kings  of 
France  since  about  1000,  and  boasted  a royal  musical  establishment  — 
the  Royal  Chapel. 

To  this  region  belonged  many  of  the  theoretical  writers  already  named 
(sec.  36).  In  the  I2-I3th  centuries  Leoninus,  Perotinus,  Robert  de  Sabilon 
and  Petrus  de  Cruce  were  successively  choirmasters  at  Notre  Dame  in 
Paris,  and  all  contributed  to  the  advancing  art  of  polyphonic  writing  for  the 
Church. 

The  best-known  of  the  Trouveres  proper  was  Adam  de  la  Hale  (d.  1287), 
born  at  Arras  in  1240,  at  first  employed  in  church  music,  but  later  attracted 
to  a roving  life,  living  at  Paris  and  finally  at  Naples.  His  genius  was  shown 
in  lyric  songs  in  Trouvere  style,  in  polyphonic  rondeaux  and  motets,  and  in 
several  song-plays,  chief  of  which  was  Robin  et  Marion  (Naples,  1285),  which 
is  often  called  the  first  comic  opera.  His  works  are  most  interesting  as 
representing  the  complex  styles  of  the  period  that  presaged  the  era  of  the 
Netherlanders. 

40.  The  Minnesinger.  — Soon  after  the  rise  of  the  Troubadours 
in  France  a somewhat  similar  movement  began  in  Germany, 
though  whether  the  two  were  directly  connected  is  disputed. 
Perhaps  they  were  simply  parallel  expressions  of  the  spirit  of 
the  time.  The  poets  of  this  order  were  called  Minnesinger 
(love-singers,  from  minne , love).  It  is  thought  that  their  art 
was  much  more  an  expansion  of  the  mediaeval  adoration  of  the 
Virgin  as  the  ideal  of  womanhood  than  in  the  case  of  the  Trouba- 
dours, but  it  was  also  an  expression  of  the  spirit  of  chivalry,  for 
their  verses  were  full  of  the  same  fanciful  gallantry,  though 
their  objects  were  not  so  constantly  married  women. 

The  leaders  and  patrons  of  this  school  of  poesy  and  song  were  of  noble 
rank,  notably  all  the  Hohenstaufens  from  Barbarossa  (d.  1190)  to  Con- 
radin  (d.  1268),  with  Wencelaus  I.  of  Bohemia  (d.  1253)  and  many 
princes  of  eastern  Germany  generally. 

The  Minnesinger  flourished  chiefly  in  the  region  of  southern  Germany 
included  in  a triangle  whose  base  extends  eastward  from  Strassburg  or 
Basle  on  the  Upper  Rhine  to  Vienna  on  the  Danube,  the  apex  being  in 
Thuringia  or  Franconia.  Celebrated  headquarters  were  Freiburg  in  the 
Breisgau  on  the  west,  Vienna  in  the  east,  and  several  points  in  Thuringia. 


90 


POLYPHONY  AND  SECULAR  SONG 


This  region  abuts  on  the  west  upon  that  affected  by  the  Trouv^res. 
Hence  the  western  Minnesinger  were  often  influenced  by  French  models, 
while  those  in  Austria  or  Bohemia  were  rather  dominated  by  indigenous 
popular  song. 

The  early  strength  of  the  movement,  with  its  connection  with  courtly 
pomp,  was  evinced  in  a notable  song-contest  said  to  have  been  held  at 
the  stately  fortress  of  the  Wartburg  (Thuringia)  in  1207  under  the 
patronage  of  the  Landgrave  Hermann  — an  occasion  celebrated  in  a half- 
mythic  way  by  a curious  narrative  poem  (whence  came  part  of  the  plot 
of  Wagner’s  opera  Tannhauser  in  1845). 

In  general,  the  Minnesongs  differ  from  those  of  Provence  in 
more  emphasis  upon  the  beauty  of  nature,  upon  religious  feel- 
ings, and  upon  abstract  qualities  of  character,  though  many  are 
not  wanting  in  passion,  pure  fancy  and  even  jocularity.  Their 
versification  is  far  less  conscious  and  artificial.  They  are  often 
less  lyric  than  epic  or  reflective  in  style,  verging  more  upon 
heroic  or  bardic  poetry  than  the  casual  songs  of  the  light-hearted 
Troubadours.  Being  akin  to  the  sagas  and  runes  of  the  North 
generally,  materials  in  them  have  often  been  sought  for  dra- 
matic treatment. 

The  melodies  were  more  austere  and  stately  than  those  of 
Provence,  though  ultimately  marked  by  the  same  modern 
rhythm,  phrase  and  tonality,  with  the  indescribable  naivete 
that  belongs  to  Germanic  folk-music.  At  first,  however,  they 
adhered  more  to  the  formless  style  of  Plain-Song,  not  very  dif- 
ferent from  a modulated  recitative.  The  text  was  primary  and 
the  melody  subordinate,  so  that,  like  the  Greeks,  the  Minne- 
singer have  been  called  * rhapsodists  * rather  than  song-singers. 
Yet  the  principle  of  the  true  song  was  not  absent,  finally  shap- 
ing melodies  into  forms  related  to  the  popular  airs  that  in  the 
16th  century  led  to  the  Protestant  chorales. 

Performance  depended  much  on  the  warmth  and  depth  of  expression 
imparted  by  the  singer  rather  than  on  the  essential  charm  of  the  tone- 
design.  Hence  Minnesongs  can  seldom  be  reproduced  with  the  same 
pleasurable  effect  as,  for  instance,  some  of  the  Trouvere  songs. 

As  a rule,  the  Minnesinger  avoided  the  help  of  jongleurs, 
probably  from  a sense  of  the  dignity  of  their  art.  They  were 
their  own  interpreters  and  accompanists,  and,  though  using  the 
same  classes  of  instruments  as  in  France,  were  not  apparently 
urgent  about  instrumental  effects.  The  true  Minnesong,  there- 


THE  MEISTERSINGER 


91 


fore,  did  not  pass  readily  into  forms  of  popular  song.  Its  char- 
acter and  associations  kept  it  mainly  in  the  hands  of  a limited, 
aristocratic  class.  Its  direct  influence  upon  music  in  general 
was  less  than  in  the  case  of  the  Troubadours. 

Yet  there  is  evidence  that  it  contributed  to  the  early  development  of  the 
Meistersinger  movement,  which  belonged  to  the  middle  classes.  Possibly, 
too,  back  of  the  Minnesong,  particularly  in  Austria,  lay  forms  of  popular 
song,  now  lost. 

The  chronological  limits  of  the  Minnesinger  period  are  somewhat  disputed. 
Some  include  in  it  only  poets  of  the  later  12th  century,  ending  the  list  with 
Heinrich  von  Meissen  [Frauenlob]  (d.  1318),  while  others  add  some  names  in 
the  early  13th  century. 

41.  The  Meistersinger.  — Following  the  Minnesinger  came  the 
Meistersinger.  The  exact  relation  between  the  two  is  not  clear, 
though  the  Meistersinger  were  wont  to  look  back  to  certain  of 
their  predecessors  as  authorities,  and  there  is  an  evident  kinship 
between  the  more  formal  Minnesongs  and  the  mechanicalness 
of  the  typical  Mastersongs. 

The  name  Meistersinger  came  from  the  notion  that  only  those  who 
had  won  the  technical  title  of  ‘ masters  1 or  experts  were  competent  to 
fix  the  standard  of  verse  and  song.  It  also  recalls  the  fact  that  among 
the  Minnesinger  a poet  of  less  than  noble  rank  was  called  Meister  (in 
distinction  from  Ritter , knight). 

Unlike  their  forerunners,  the  Meistersinger  were  wholly  drawn 
from  the  rapidly  rising  burgher  or  tradesman  class,  often  from  the 
humblest  and  rudest  artisans.  Their  prominence  from  the  14th 
to  the  1 6th  centuries  was  an  incident  in  the  evolution  of  society, 
when  the  old  regime  of  country  life  under  feudal  conditions  was 
being  replaced  by  manufactures  and  trades  in  organized  towns. 

A striking  characteristic  of  the  Meistersinger  was  their  custom  of 
forming  local  societies,  more  or  less  secret  and  exclusive,  like  the  many 
guilds  or  trades-unions  into  which  craftsmen  of  every  sort  were  begin- 
ning to  be  organized  in  the  strong  commercial  towns  of  Germany. 
These  clubs  were  governed  by  elaborate  rules.  Entrance  was  by  a kind 
of  initiation.  The  members  were  divided  into  classes,  from  the  novices 
or  ‘ scholars 1 up  to  the  accepted  ‘ masters,1  and  were  presided  over 
by  several  kinds  of  officers.  Each  guild  had  its  hall,  its  insignia  of 
membership,  its  special  rules  and  traditional  ceremony  or  procedure. 
Some  of  their  gatherings  were  of  the  nature  of  drills  or  singing-schools, 
while  others  were  formal  contests  or  trials  of  skill.  In  the  latter  the 
function  of  the  judges  or  ‘markers’  was  important,  since  by  their  rulings 


92 


POLYPHONY  AND  SECULAR  SONG 


a standard  of  effort  was  set  up,  often  in  a way  to  discourage  all  freshness 
of  invention. 

Starting  from  Mayence  on  the  Rhine  soon  after  1300,  the  guilds  multi- 
plied rapidly  throughout  central  Germany,  the  noted  centres  in  the  14th 
century  being  Frankfort,  Colmar,  Nuremberg,  Zwickau  and  Prague.  To 
these  were  added  in  the  15th  Strassburg,  Augsburg,  Ratisbon,  Ulm  and 
Munich.  In  the  16th  the  centre  of  activity  shifted  more  to  the  east  and 
north.  Although  after  1600  the  significance  of  the  movement  rapidly 
declined,  yet  organizations  continued  in  many  places.  Indeed,  it  was  not 
until  1839  that  the  last  of  the  guilds,  that  of  Ulm,  disbanded,  and  the  last 
person  who  had  been  a member  did  not  die  till  1876. 

Among  the  many  Meistersinger  known  to  us  by  name  the  only  one  of  last- 
ing renown  was  the  cobbler  of  Nuremberg,  Hans  Sachs  (d.  1576),  whose 
homely  but  sturdy  genius  has  been  widely  recognized. 

The  historic  influence  of  the  Meistersinger  movement  was 
considerable,  since  it  affected  all  Germany  and  spread  some- 
what to  adjacent  countries.  In  many  quarters  it  was  supposed 
to  represent  a real  form  of  art.  In  the  later  15th  century  and 
afterward,  some  of  its  strange  melodies  were  adopted  as  subjects 
for  treatment  by  composers,  and  probably  they  exercised  some 
influence  upon  the  beginnings  of  popular  religious  song  at  the 
Reformation.  But,  on  the  whole,  the  movement  was  devoid  of 
that  ideality,  freedom  and  spontaneity  that  make  for  genuine 
artistic  progress.  Its  only  positive  utilities  were  its  indirect 
emphasis  upon  music  as  a dignified  and  worthy  pursuit  and  the 
dissemination  among  its  adherents  of  a certain  degree  of  techni- 
cal knowledge. 


T r^TTM'rr 


xt FvrnT  AMn 


CHAPTER  VI 


THE  FIFTEENTH  CENTURY 

42.  In  General.  — We  now  turn  back  to  the  unfolding  art  of 
polyphony,  which,  from  about  1400,  was  at  length  thoroughly 
mastered  and  fully  applied  to  religious  uses.  From  this  time 
the  mere  invention  and  sharpening  of  implements  gave  place 
to  positive  artistic  production.  Though  few  of  even  the  best 
works  of  the  15th  century  remain  in  use  now,  simply  because 
the  musical  world  has  entered  paths  then  quite  unimagined, 
their  real  importance  remains  unquestionable.  No  just  view 
of  any  art  is  possible  without  conceding  all  honor  to  its 
pioneers. 

While  the  growth  of  secular  song  from  the  12th  century  was 
widespread,  the  conditions  of  society  indicated  that  the  chief 
application  of  music  as  an  art  must  be  first  in  the  Church,  which 
was  the  only  social  institution  of  general  stability.  The  age 
was  dominated  to  a peculiar  degree  by  religion.  All  social 
life  revolved  about  ecclesiastical  observances,  and  the  best 
thought  took  its  stimulus  and  guidance  thence.  Music,  like 
the  other  arts,  remained  emphatically  the  protege  and  servitor  of 
the  Church. 

But  in  the  new  developments  we  find  the  centre  of  interest 
shifted  to  the  extreme  west  of  Europe,  where  secular  and 
sacred  song  had  full  opportunity  to  react  upon  each  other. 

43.  The  Netherlands  the  New  Art-Centre.  — The  headquarters 
of  progress  is  now  found  in  the  region  north  of  the  Seine  in 
France  and  west  of  the  Meuse  — the  provinces  of  Flanders  and 
Brabant,  with  part  of  Burgundy. 

The  reasons  for  the  prominence  of  this  little  section  were  largely  po- 
litical— its  comparative  peace  and  the  wisdom  of  its  rulers.  But  they 
were  also  economic,  its  many  populous  towns  being  already  launched  on 
that  fascinating  career  of  commercial  prosperity  that  presently  made  their 
people  the  merchant-princes  of  western  Europe.  The  Netherlander  now 
began  to  display  a civic  and  national  spirit  like  that  of  the  best  modern 
nations,  and  their  interest  in  music  was  simply  a part  of  their  general 
enterprise  and  independence. 


93 


94 


THE  FIFTEENTH  CENTURY 


Other  parts  of  Europe  were  also  moving  along  similar  lines,  though 
with  more  interruption.  Northern  Italy  presents  many  analogies,  espe- 
cially in  the  prominence  of  large  commercial  towns,  but  there  was  much 
less  unity  of  effort.  England,  too,  was  coming  forward  as  a home  of  free 
enterprise,  though  not  equal  to  her  neighbor  across  the  North  Sea. 

The  period  is  here  called  that  of  the  Netherlanders.  It  has  also  been 
called  Flemish  or  Belgian,  neither  of  which  is  quite  satisfactory.  It 
might  also  be  called  Burgundian,  since  from  1363  for  over  a century  it 
owed  much  to  the  four  great  dukes,  Philip  the  Bold  (d.  1404),  John  the 
Fearless  (d.  1419),  Philip  the  Good  (d.  1467)  and  Charles  the  Bold 
(d.  1477),  all  of  whom  were  friends  of  culture,  especially  music  and  paint- 
ing. Their  territory  varied  in  extent,  often  reaching  from  Antwerp  on 
the  north  clear  to  the  Mediterranean,  including  fully  half  of  modern 
France,  favorite  seats  of  the  court  being  Ghent  or  Bruges.  In  the 
struggles  between  France  and  England  the  dukes  usually  sided  with  the 
latter  — which  throws  light  on  the  close  connection  in  music  between 
the  Netherlanders  and  the  English. 

The  Netherland  school  of  sacred  composition  took  its  rise 
in  some  way  from  the  later  developments  of  secular  song  in 
northern  France.  If  all  the  facts  could  be  gathered,  it  is 
likely  that  from  the  ablest  Trouveres,  like  Adam  de  la  Hale 
(d.  1287),  to  the  earliest  of  the  contrapuntists,  like  Dunstable 
and  Dufay  (active  by  about  1420),  a series  of  works  could  be 
found  with  a continuous  advance  in  method.  While  we  can- 
not adequately  fill  this  gap  of  almost  one  hundred  and  fifty 
years,  it  is  clear  that  the  transition  from  the  solo  minstrel-song 
to  the  polyphonic  mass  was  made  through  the  form  known  as  the 
‘chanson  ’ (the  same  word  as  the  canson  of  the  Troubadours,  but  a 
different  thing).  This  was  a secular  piece  in  which  a central 
melody  or  air  was  enriched  by  one  to  three  other  voice-parts  so 
as  to  make  a rude  part-song. 

The  composer’s  object  was  not  to  produce  a true  chord-sequence  (which 
would  have  involved  more  harmonic  knowledge  than  the  age  possessed), 
but  simply  to  match  together  two  or  three  melodies  as  such.  The  foun- 
dation melody  or  cantus  firmus,  selected  from  the  stock  of  existing  songs, 
sacred  or  secular,  was  usually  given  to  a middle  voice  (ultimately  called 
the  ‘tenor,’  because  it  ‘held  ’ or  carried  the  theme),  and  the  added  voices 
were  the  ‘bass’  below  and  the  ‘alto’  or  ‘soprano’  (‘treble’)  above,  some- 
times both,  giving  four-part  effects. 

From  the  13th  century  we  have  a considerable  list  of  chan- 
sonniers,  with  many  works  of  varying  complexity.  It  is  evident 
that  the  art  of  composition  is  converging  upon  part-writing  of  a 
novel  kind.  In  the  14th  century  for  some  reason  the  number 


THE  NETHERLANDERS 


95 


of  names  and  works  extant  is  not  so  large,  but  they  are  enough 
to  show  that  the  style  is  being  cultivated  with  growing  assur- 
ance. At  the  opening  of  the  15th  century  we  are  suddenly 
confronted  by  an  imposing  array  of  composers,  represented 
by  many  works  in  several  varieties,  especially  masses,  motets 
and  chansons,  all  showing  plain  connections  with  previous 
styles,  but  with  an  artistic  quality  that  is  new.  Appar- 
ently, then,  the  14th  century  saw  the  gradual  transmutation 
of  the  secular  part-song,  often  hardly  more  than  a fugitive 
improvisation,  into  the  extended  mass,  wrought  out  with  care- 
ful study  and  fully  written  down  so  as  to  secure  the  intended 
effect.  From  the  original  stage,  when  the  aim  was  the  mere 
amusement  of  some  courtly  circle,  to  the  final  one,  when  the 
enrichment  of  the  cathedral  service  was  attempted,  was  a strik- 
ing transition,  though  not  unparalleled  in  later  musical  history. 

Into  this  transition  were  gathered  up  all  the  discoveries  of  the 
ecclesiastical  theorists  who  for  two  or  three  centuries  had  been 
at  work  upon  the  rudiments  of  polyphony  as  a science.  But  it 
appears  that  only  when  these  monkish  speculations  had  been 
touched  by  the  spirit  and  spontaneity  of  popular  song  could  a 
genuine  type  of  fine  art  emerge. 

As  a hint  of  the  richness  of  the  13th-century  chanson  period  it  may  be 
noted  that  in  the  dictionaries  are  the  names  of  more  than  a score  of  writers 
from  whom  at  least  300  pieces  exist  — all,  of  course,  mere  songs  or  ballads,  not 
developed  part-songs.  The  origin  of  these  was  in  northern  France.  In  the 
14th  century  we  have  fewer  names,  like  Jehannot  Lescurel,  the  earliest  to  pre- 
figure the  Netherland  style,  and  Guillaume  de  Machau  (d.  c.  1372),  from  whom 
many  works  are  extant,  including  two-  and  three-part  chansons,  rondeaux  and 
motets,  with  one  mass.  All  these  worked  in  the  neighborhood  of  Paris. 
In  the  early  15th  century  we  still  hear  of  important  Parisian  dechanteurs — 
Cesaris,  Tapissier,  Carmen — thought  worthy  to  rank  with  the  leading  Nether- 
land pioneers,  besides  the  able  Henricus  de  Zeelandia,  whose  writings  are  cited 
as  fully  introducing  the  developed  style  of  Dufay.  His  name  shows  that  he 
was  himself  a Netherlander. 

44.  Secular  Melodies  and  the  Mass.  — Among  the  signs  of 
the  dependence  of  the  Netherland  school  upon  the  traditions 
of  secular  music  were  the  tendency  of  leading  composers  to 
write  purely  secular  pieces  and  their  constant  use  of  secular 
melodies  as  ‘subjects’  for  their  masses  and  other  church  works. 
The  absolute  invention  of  ‘subjects’  being  almost  unknown, 
some  favorite  theme  was  selected  as  the  thread  about  which 


96 


THE  FIFTEENTH  CENTURY 


the  counterpoint  should  crystallize.  This  ‘ subject,’  or  parts 
of  it,  was  used  over  and  over  in  the  successive  movements 
of  a mass,  supplying  in  the  tenor  a fixed  nucleus  more  or  less 
familiar,  while  the  ingenuity  of  the  composer  consisted  in  ad- 
justing to  it  manifold  figures  and  phrases  in  the  other  voices, 
occasionally  in  imitation. 

In  consequence,  masses  were  known  by  the  titles  of  their  ‘subjects,’  as 
the  Mass  ‘ L'onime  arme  ’ or  ‘ Se  la  face  ay  pale  ’ (popular  songs  used 
in  unnumbered  instances),  or  Eloy’s  Mass  ‘ Dixerunt  discipulP  (from 
Plain-Song).  Later,  practice-phrases  from  the  singing-school  were  simi- 
larly used,  as  in  Des  Pres’  Mass  ‘ La , sol , fa,  re,  mi .’ 

It  should  be  added  that  this  practice  of  mixing  words  and  styles  seems 
to  have  been  one  of  the  early  characteristics  of  the  form  known  as  the 
‘motet’  (see  sec.  55). 

Not  only  were  the  tunes  of  well-known  songs  thus  incorpo- 
rated, but  in  many  cases  their  words  were  actually  sung  by  the 
tenor  while  the  other  voices  were  proceeding  with  the  pre- 
scribed Latin  text  — a practice  so  open  to  abuse,  especially 
when  frivolous  or  immoral  thoughts  were  suggested,  as  to  call 
out  in  the  16th  century  the  formal  rebuke  of  the  Church.  In 
the  beginning,  however,  this  free  use  of  secular  materials  in  the 
most  solemn  works  was  not  irreverent,  but  simply  a token  of 
the  source  whence  the  whole  style  of  writing  came. 

Here  is  a suitable  place  to  state  once  for  all  that  wherever  a musical 
‘mass’  is  mentioned,  it  includes  only  those  specific  exercises  in  the 
liturgy  that  are  traditionally  assigned  to  the  choir,  acting  as  an  auxiliary 
to  the  officiants  at  the  altar.  It  does  not  include  any  of  the  many  pas- 
sages recited  or  intoned  by  those  officiants  themselves  — these  being  in 
Plain-Song.  Neither  does  it  properly  include  any  variable  parts  of  the 
service,  the  text  of  which  depends  upon  the  day  or  the  season — these 
being  rather  ‘ motets.’ 

The  invariable  choir  exercises  include  (a)  the  Kyrie  eleison  or  general 
cry  for  mercy  that  follows  the  Introit,  (b)  the  Gloria  in  excelsis  immedi- 
ately succeeding,  which  is  often  divided  into  distinct  sections,  beginning 
respectively  with  the  words  Dominus  Deus,  Qui  tollis,  and  Qnoniam  tu 
solus,  (c)  the  Credo  or  Nicene  Creed,  usually  divided  into  sections  at 
the  words  Incarnatus  est,  Crucifixus , Et  resurrexit , and  Et  in  Spiritum 
Sanctum,  ( d ) the  Sanctus,  with  the  Hosanna , before  the  Elevation,  ( e ) 
the  Benedictus  qui  venit,  after  the  Elevation,  and  (f)  the  Agnus  Dei,  at 
the  Commixture,  the  latter  part  of  which,  the  Dona  nobis  pacem,  being 
often  treated  by  itself.  To  these  are  often  added  a setting  of  the  Gradual, 
the  hymn  intervening  between  the  Epistle  and  the  Gospel,  and  of  the 
Ojfertorium , the  hymn  following  the  Credo  — both  of  these  being  vari- 
able. There  is  an  obvious  difference  of  intention  in  the  various  num- 


FIRST  GROUP  OF  MASTERS 


97 


bers,  the  Sanctus,  Benedictus  and  Agnus  Dei  being  naturally  the  most 
solemn  and  tender,  since  they  accompany  the  ceremony  of  the  Com- 
munion itself. 

45.  First  Group  of  Masters. — About  1420  three  young  com- 
posers stepped  forth  into  activity  who  inaugurated  an  era  in 
music-history,  namely,  Dunstable,  Binchois  and  Dufay.  Of 
these,  Dunstable  is  usually  reckoned  the  pioneer,  though  Dufay 
for  various  reasons  has  the  greater  fame  as  distinctive  of  the 
period.  Which  happened  to  have  been  earlier  is  of  no  great 
moment,  since  they  did  not  so  much  create  a new  art  as  achieve 
the  special  advance  that  had  long  been  foreshadowed.  They 
all  pushed  forward  along  similar  lines  — in  secular  chansons  for 
two  or  three  voices,  in  motets  of  somewhat  similar  construction, 
and  in  formal  and  stricter  settings  of  the  mass  (though  here 
Dunstable  is  not  represented  by  works  now  extant). 

The  problem  before  them  was,  under  the  stimulus  of  secular 
song,  to  take  the  principles  of  polyphony  that  theorists  had 
already  worked  out  and  to  produce  definite  compositions  that 
should  contain  enough  compressed  reflection  and  sentiment  to 
be  artistic.  The  only  method  of  procedure  known  was  contra- 
puntal, not  harmonic  in  the  modern  sense  — the  interweaving 
of  independent  voice-parts  around  some  ‘subject’  or  thread  of 
melody  adopted  as  a basis,  rather  than  the  unfolding  of  chord- 
sequences  as  such  or  the  exposition  of  a conspicuous  homo- 
phonic  melody.  All  the  effects  in  view  were  strictly  vocal,  in- 
struments being  employed,  if  at  all,  only  to  double  the  voice-parts, 
and  much  depending  upon  the  singers’  purity  of  intonation  and 
sympathy  of  rendering.  Real  solo  effects  were  unknown, 
though  usually  the  voices  entered  one  by  one  for  the  sake  of 
individuality.  The  value  of  ‘imitation,’  often  strictly  canonic, 
was  appreciated.  But  there  was  only  a vague  sense  of  the 
utility  of  dividing  works  into  clear  and  somewhat  commensurate 
sections  as  dictated  by  the  modern  doctrine  of  ‘ form.’  Since, 
then,  these  early  works  lack  several  features  now  universal, 
they  seem  angular  and  crude  to  modern  taste.  But  they  con- 
tained the  germ  of  much  that  is  precious. 

John  Dunstable  (d.  1453)  is  known  only  through  a few  scattered  references 
and  a fair  number  of  compositions.  We  infer  that  he  was  born  at  Dunstable 
(35  m.  northwest  of  London),  but  when  is  not  known.  He  is  mentioned  by  a 

H 


98 


THE  FIFTEENTH  CENTURY 


French  poet,  Martin  le  Franc  (probably  before  1440),  who  cites  him  as  the 
model  of  Dufay  and  Binchois.  By  this  time,  too,  works  of  his  had  been 
copied  as  far  away  as  the  Tyrol.  Later  writers  call  him  the  first  contrapunt- 
ist. He  was  buried  in  London,  and  two  epitaphs  extol  his  skill  in  music, 
mathematics  and  astrology.  His  existing  works  are  all  motets  or  secular 
songs,  mostly  in  Continental  libraries.  Davey  (Hist.  Eng.  Mus.,  1895)  pleads 
strenuously  for  Dunstable  as  the  inventor  of  counterpoint  and  for  England  as 
the  birthplace  of  the  new  style  in  general.  Yet  from  1350  to  1450  the  relations 
between  England  and  northern  France  were  extremely  close,  so  that  neither 
was  independent.  Davey  conjectures  that  Dunstable  was  in  the  English 
Chapel  Royal,  supposed  to  have  been  organized  under  Henry  V.,  and  that  he 
took  part  in  the  musical  services  incident  to  Henry’s  victories  in  France  in 
1418-9. 

With  Dunstable  are  associated  several  other  English  names,  with  similar 
works,  such  as  Lionel  Power,  John  Benet,  Richard  Markham,  etc. 

Gilles  Binchois  (d.  1460)  was  born  near  Mons  in  Hainaut.  In  youth  he  was 
a soldier,  but  about  1425  he  is  named  as  a singer  in  the  Ducal  Chapel  of  Bur- 
gundy and  about  1437  choirmaster.  He  died  at  Lille.  Tinctor  (c.  1475) 
said  that  his  name  would  “ endure  for  ever.”  Extant  works  of  his,  however, 
are  rather  few  — fragments  of  masses  and  chansons. 

Guillaume  Dufay  (d.  1474)  was  born  somewhere  in  Hainaut  and  was  trained 
as  a choirboy  at  Cambrai,  where  the  church  music  was  famous.  He  seems  to 
have  written  polyphonic  songs  for  weddings  in  Italy  in  1416  and  1419.  In 
1428  he  entered  the  Papal  Chapel  at  Rome,  remaining  till  1437.  After  this, 
besides  spending  seven  years  in  Savoy,  he  held  office  in  the  cathedrals  of 
Cambrai,  Mons  and  Bruges,  residing  finally  at  Cambrai,  where  he  died,  highly 
honored  throughout  Europe.  His  extant  works  are  numerous,  including  many 
masses,  motets,  chansons,  etc.  In  range  and  amount  of  production  he  far 
outstrips  his  contemporaries.  Adam  von  Fulda  (c.  1500)  asserts  that  he 
decidedly  improved  notation.  [Through  a serious  error  of  Baini  (1828)  the 
dates  of  his  life  are  often  given  as  1380-1432.] 

To  the  middle  of  the  15th  century  also  belong  many  other  names,  including 
Petrus  de  Domart,  whom  Tinctor  apparently  cites  and  from  whom  some  masses 
remain;  Philippe  Caron,  perhaps  a pupil  of  Dufay,  represented  by  some 
masses  and  many  four-voice  chansons ; Vincent  Faugues,  from  whom  come 
several  masses,  copied  at  Rome  about  1450 ; Anthoine  Busnois  (d.  1492),  per- 
haps a pupil  of  Binchois,  from  1467  a singer  in  the  Burgundian  Chapel,  noted 
as  one  of  the  best  of  the  early  school,  from  whom  are  preserved  a number  of 
works,  sacred  and  secular ; Eloy,  whose  career  is  entirely  unknown,  unless, 
perhaps,  he  was  a singer  at  Milan  about  1475,  but  of  whose  able  style  some 
samples  exist ; and  Hayne  van  Ghizeghem,  in  the  Burgundian  Chapel  in  1468, 
known  by  several  chansons  of  merit. 

46.  Second  Group  of  Masters.  — Late  in  the  15th  century  it  is 
clear  that  a decided  advance  took  place  in  skill  and  in  breadth 
of  influence.  While  distinguishing  between  two  groups  of  com- 
posers, the  authorities  do  not  agree  as  to  the  assignment  of 


SECOND  GROUP  OF  MASTERS 


99 


names.  The  ‘ new  school’  found  its  culmination  in  the  command- 
ing genius  of  Okeghem,  who  became  the  pattern  for  a multitude 
of  talented  disciples,  through  whom  the  Netherland  traditions 
were  disseminated  far  and  wide.  Obrecht  follows  close  upon 
Okeghem  in  importance. 

The  salient  characteristic  of  this  group  was  the  pushing  of 
the  technique  of  contrapuntal  construction  to  an  extreme. 
Every  device  of  imitation  between  the  voices  was  worked  out 
with  infinite  ingenuity  and  patience,  from  the  plain  canon  at 
various  intervals  to  canonic  imitation  by  augmentation,  diminu- 
tion, inversion  and  reversion,  thus  preparing  for  the  much  later 
fugue.  The  number  of  voices  was  frequently  five  or  six,  occa- 
sionally twelve,  sixteen,  twenty-four  or  even  more.  Though 
the  custom  of  borrowing  ‘subjects’  still  obtained,  the  ability  to 
invent  them  increased,  often  with  some  gain  in  expressiveness. 
The  handling  of  details  was  more  certain  and  varied,  avoiding 
the  stiffness  of  earlier  works  and  often  aiming  at  effects  some- 
what grand  and  imposing. 

The  skill  of  the  period  tended  to  expend  itself  on  the  purely  intellectual 
side  of  composition.  The  heaping  together  of  intricacies  was  often  so 
great  that  sentiment  and  beauty  were  lost  in  merely  curious  feats  of  poly- 
phonic dexterity.  The  texts  were  often  treated  as  if  of  slight  account  — 
single  words,  for  example,  being  spun  out  over  long  passages  until  wholly 
unintelligible.  Too  little  care  was  taken  to  adjust  the  general  effect  to 
the  spirit  of  the  words. 

This  second  school,  in  spite  of  its  extremes,  rendered  immense 
service  to  the  progress  of  composition  through  its  conquest  of 
certain  materials  and  methods.  If  it  had  done  nothing  more,  it 
would  deserve  respect  for  making  later  achievements  possible. 
But  it  also  left  a notable  array  of  works  that  are  still  remarkable 
as  artistic  monuments. 

The  expansion  of  the  geographical  range  of  composers  attracts  notice. 
In  the  Netherlands  themselves  a new  centre  appears  at  Antwerp.  Several 
Italian  cities  begin  to  rival  those  of  the  west,  while  Germany,  Austria  and 
England  exhibit  independent  musical  life. 

Many  other  princely  courts  besides  that  of  Burgundy  acquired  renown 
as  musical  centres.  The  maintenance  of  a musical  establishment  be- 
comes a more  regular  feature  of  royal  or  princely  luxury.  Such  estab- 
lishments were  technically  known  as  ‘Chapels,1  and  the  chief  musician 
in  them,  who  was  both  composer  and  conductor,  was  ‘Chapel-master1 
( Chapelain , Maitre  de  chapelle , Maestro  di  cappella , Kapellmeister,  etc.). 
In  time  the  Papal  Chapel  at  Rome  became  the  most  famous,  but  earlier 


100 


THE  FIFTEENTH  CENTURY 


the  Chapels  Royal  of  England  and  France  were  prominent.  Most  large 
bishoprics,  also,  aimed  to  maintain  at  their  cathedrals  musical  forces  of 
ability.  This  dependence  of  music  upon  the  official  patronage  of  the 
Church  and  of  courts  remains  conspicuous  until  the  19th  century.  [For 
convenience,  the  head  of  a chapel  will  in  following  pages  be  designated 
as  1 choirmaster.’] 

Jean  de  Okeghem  (d.  1495),  born  at  Termonde  in  East  Flanders  soon  after 
1430,  had  his  first  training  as  a choirboy  at  Antwerp  in  1443-4,  entered  the 
Royal  Chapel  at  Paris  in  1452  and  was  soon  made  choirmaster,  in  which  post 
he  apparently  continued  till  his  death,  though  also  serving  for  a time  as  cathe- 
dral-treasurer at  Tours.  He  was  employed  by  three  kings  in  succession,  is 
said  to  have  taught  many  pupils,  and  was  often  styled  ‘ Prince  of  Music.’ 
His  genius  set  Paris  in  the  first  rank  as  a musical  capital.  His  extant  works 
include  about  20  masses,  many  motets  and  chansons,  etc.,  of  unquestioned 
importance.  In  technique  and  genius  he  rises  above  all  his  contemporaries. 

It  is  impossible  to  arrange  the  names  of  the  period  in  any  satisfactory 
order,  or  to  be  sure  which  most  deserve  mention,  since  so  many  details  are 
unknown.  The  following,  at  least,  should  be  named  : — 

More  or  less  associated  with  Antwerp  were  Jacques  Barbireau  (d.  1491), 
born  in  Hainaut,  for  more  than  forty  years  choirmaster  at  Antwerp  and 
highly  honored  as  an  authority  elsewhere,  but  whose  known  works  are  few; 
Jacob  Obrecht  (d.  1505),  who  was  born  at  Utrecht  about  1430,  probably  was 
choirmaster  there  in  1465,  later  visited  Italy,  taught  at  Cambrai  in  1483-5, 
later  at  Bruges  and  at  Antwerp  in  1492-1504,  dying  of  the  plague  at  Ferrara, 
and  whose  numerous  works  show  a genius  that  has  much  to  attract  a modern 
taste,  including  one  of  the  earliest  Passions  known;  Antonius  Wyngaerde 
(d.  1499),  also  born  at  Utrecht,  and  a singer  at  Antwerp  Cathedral,  whom 
Glarean  names  as  a fine  contrapuntist,  but  whose  works  have  nearly  all  van- 
ished; and  Jean  Regis,  who  taught  at  Antwerp  as  early  as  1463.  Possibly 
Philippon  de  Bourges  and  others  should  here  be  added. 

In  Italy,  Netherland  musicians  begin  to  be  in  request,  like  Guillaume 
Guarneri,  who  worked  first  at  Milan  and  later  at  Naples,  besides  serving  in 
the  Papal  Chapel  in  1474-83  ; Gaspar  Weerbecke  (d.  1514),  born  about 
1440  at  Oudenarde,  who  made  his  reputation  from  1472  as  teacher  and  court- 
choirmaster  at  Milan,  and  was  in  the  Papal  Chapel  in  1481-9,  and  again  in 
1499-1509,  returning  to  Milan  in  the  interval,  and  whose  extant  works  are 
many ; and  Alexander  Agricola  (d.  1506  ?),  an  eccentric  writer,  probably  born 
about  1446,  long  a singer  at  Milan,  from  1474  in  southern  Italy,  later  at 
Mantua,  then  from  1500  choirmaster  at  Brussels,  and  finally  in  Spain. 

In  Spain  should  be  noted  Francisco  de  Penalosa  (d.  1535),  who  was  court- 
musician  to  Ferdinand  V.  of  Castile,  and  of  whose  works  much  remains. 

In  Germany,  also,  talented  contrapuntists  begin  to  appear,  among  the 
earliest  being  Traugott  Eugenius,  cantor  at  Thorn  (on  the  Polish  border) 
about  1490,  who  wrote  some  fifty  part-songs,  and  Heinrich  Finck  (d.  1519  ?), 
who  was  born  at  Bamberg,  studied  at  Leipsic,  served  long  in  Poland,  where 
he  was  royal  choirmaster  in  1492-1506,  and  then  removed  to  Stuttgart — rep- 
resented by  many  notable  German  part-songs  and  much  sacred  music  of  a 
lower  order. 


THIRD  GROUP  OF  MASTERS 


IOI 


47.  Third  Group  of  Masters.  — Immediately  following  the  pre- 
ceding group  or  interlocking  with  it  was  a third  group  which 
belongs  partly  to  the  16th  century.  On  the  one  hand,  the  ex- 
traordinary skill  in  the  niceties  of  polyphonic  technique  con- 
tinues and  is  still  sometimes  pedantically  overemphasized.  But, 
on  the  other,  under  the  lead  especially  of  Josquin  des  Pres,  Oke- 
ghem’s  greatest  pupil,  a new  drift  set  in  toward  beauty  and 
sentiment  as  the  crown  of  musical  learning.  While  the  final 
culmination  of  the  Netherlander’  art  waited  for  certain  later 
masters,  the  group  now  in  view  helped  to  make  an  important 
transition  from  the  comparatively  archaic  styles  of  the  15th 
century  to  the  more  flowing  and  emotional  ones  of  the  16th. 
The  line  between  the  two  groups  is  not  easy  to  draw,  but  as  we 
move  forward  into  the  next  generation  after  Okeghem,  we  begin 
to  feel  the  peculiar  stimulus  that  the  new  century  certainly  gave 
to  all  music,  so  that  in  the  works  of  these  masters  we  catch  the 
quality  of  enduring  vitality  and  elevation  by  which  the  whole 
1 6th  century  is  characterized.  The  art  of  music  was  beginning 
to  take  a place  side  by  side  with  the  arts  of  design. 

It  is  usual,  following  a single  and  rather  ambiguous  reference,  to  name  sev- 
eral composers  as  actually  pupils  of  Okeghem.  These  may  well  be  grouped 
together  as  exhibiting  a maturer  style. 

Josquin  des  Pres  (d.  1521)  was  by  far  the  greatest.  He  was  born  about 
1445,  probably  at  Conde  in  Hainaut,  went  to  Italy,  where  he  held  important 
posts  at  several  courts  and  in  the  Papal  Chapel  till  towards  1500  (the  exact 
dates  are  disputed),  when  he  went  to  Paris  as  choirmaster.  His  Italian  life 
seems  to  have  associated  him  with  Florence,  Ferrara,  perhaps  Milan  and  Mo- 
dena, as  well  as  Rome.  He  is  to-day  represented  by  a larger  number  of  works 
than  any  earlier  composer,  including  manifold  specimens  in  all  the  usual  forms. 
His  style  still  arouses  delight,  since  it  is  not  only  full  of  technical  skill,  but 
charged  with  a delicate  appreciation  of  the  sense  of  the  text  and  of  tonal 
beauty  and  richness.  He  exercised  a profound  influence  upon  succeeding 
writers,  many  of  whom  were  his  pupils. 

Pierre  de  La  Rue  (d.  1518)  was  born  in  Picardy,  was  in  the  Burgundian 
Chapel  from  1492,  was  prebendary  at  Courtrai  and  Namur,  and  enjoyed  high 
esteem,  as  is  shown  by  the  unusual  care  lavished  upon  the  MSS.  of  his  works. 
He  excels  most  of  his  contemporaries  in  profundity  and  seriousness. 

Antoine  Brumel  was  born  in  French  Flanders,  was  employed  by  the  Duke 
of  Sora  at  Lyons  and  from  1505  by  the  Duke  of  Ferrara.  He  was  a prolific 
composer,  with  less  warmth  than  Josquin  and  less  depth  than  La  Rue,  but 
with  as  great  command  of  method  as  either. 

Loyset  Compare  (d.  1518)  was  also  of  Flemish  birth,  perhaps  from  St. 
Quentin,  where  he  died  as  canon.  From  his  remaining  works  it  appears  that 
his  genius  had  a peculiarly  romantic  and  tender  quality. 


102 


THE  FIFTEENTH  CENTURY 


Other  names  in  the  series  are  Jehan  Cousin,  Guillaume  Crespel,  Jean  Prioris, 
probably  organist  at  St.  Peter’s  in  Rome  from  1490  and  in  the  French  Chapel 
about  1507,  and  Jean  Verbonnet,  probably  from  about  1491  at  Ferrara  — the 
details  of  whose  lives  and  works  are  not  abundant. 

Of  the  many  other  known  contemporaries  of  Josquin,  only  a few  can  here 
be  specified.  Connected  with  Antwerp  were  Jacotin  Godebrye  (d.  1528), 
choirmaster  as  early  as  1479,  and  Noel  Baulduin  (d.  1529),  choirmaster  in 
1513-8.  Possibly  the  earlier  Philippe  Basiron  and  the  talented  Jean  Ghiselin 
also  belong  here.  Mathieu  Pipelare  and  Marbriano  de  Orto  (d.c.  1516)  are 
both  well  represented  by  existing  works,  but  their  careers  are  not  known, 
except  that  the  latter  was  in  the  Papal  Chapel  in  1484-94  and  Burgundian 
choirmaster  from  1505. 

The  further  progress  of  the  Netherland  style  was  mainly 
under  masters  whose  spheres  of  work  were  not  only  outside 
the  Netherlands,  but  conditioned  by  new  influences. 


48.  Folk-Music.  — In  immediate  connection  with  the  story 
of  the  perfecting  of  counterpoint  by  the  Netherlanders  should 
be  set  a sketch  of  the  informal  popular  music  that  developed  by 
its  side,  sometimes  serving  merely  as  a background  for  it,  some- 
times touching  it  with  positive  impetus.  In  the  15th  century 
the  expression  of  life  in  song  and  dance  began  to  become  influ- 
ential, with  results  scattered  through  all  the  centuries  since.  A 
just  estimate  of  the  changes  of  the  16th  century  is  impossible 
without  some  sense  of  the  popular  tendencies  at  work. 

As  far  back  as  we  may  go  in  the  story  of  European  civiliza- 
tion we  find  traces  of  the  use  of  song  in  common  life.  The 
same  instinct  for  musical  expression  that  is  universal  among 
uncivilized  men  persists  in  civilized  conditions.  Song  springs 
forth  spontaneously  as  the  voice  of  the  ordinary  sentiments  of 
domestic  and  communal  life,  embodying  the  feelings  belonging 
to  whatever  occupies  man’s  interest  with  intensity.  It  beguiles 
labor  and  loneliness,  and  enlivens  all  social  festivity.  It  gives 
outlet  to  exuberant  vitality,  interacts  with  all  sorts  of  bodily  and 
mental  effort,  and  brings  to  light  that  love  for  the  beautiful  and 
the  ideal  that  is  latent  in  healthy  natures.  It  passes  over 
readily  into  dancing  — the  rhythm  and  motion  of  the  voice 
fitting  closely  with  expressive  movements  of  the  body.  It  also 
turns  easily  to  the  use  of  whatever  instruments  the  singer’s  wit 
suffices  to  fashion. 


FOLIC-MUSIC 


03 


Folk-music  tends  to  associate  itself  with  several  lines  of  effort  that  in 
more  highly  developed  conditions  are  quite  distinct  from  music.  Thus  it 
is  often  mimetic  or  epic,  suggesting  incipient  stages  of  the  drama  or  of  his- 
tory. It  is  always  related  to  rudimentary  literature  of  every  kind.  It  is  apt 
to  reflect  vividly  religious  beliefs,  superstitions  and  practices.  It  belongs 
to  a grade  of  culture  where  the  many  modes  of  expression  are  not  yet 
differentiated. 

Folk-music  has  been  more  notable  at  certain  times  than  at 
others  and  among  certain  peoples.  In  the  later  Middle  Ages 
among  such  racial  groups  as  the  Kelts,  the  Teutons  and  some 
others  the  interest  in  popular  songs  and  dances  was  so  wide- 
spread that  formal  music  was  finally  forced  to  reckon  with  it. 
This  mediaeval  influence  became  important  as  the  16th  century 
approached  and  continued  potent  long  afterward. 

The  various  branches  of  the  Keltic  stock  have  always  been  singularly 
musical.  This  influence  has  been  strong  in  France  from  the  Troubadour 
time,  and  to  it  is  to  be  attributed  some  part  of  the  French  capacity  for 
gay,  piquant  and  brilliant  song  and  dance  that  has  been  notable  since  the 
14th  century.  The  Keltic  genius  is  also  evident  in  Wales,  Ireland  and 
Scotland.  Here  the  interference  of  formal  styles  has  been  so  slight  or  so 
long  delayed  that  extensive  literatures  of  folk-music  have  accumulated 
and  have  been  highly  valued.  Just  what  relation  this  has  to  the  history 
of  English  music  is  not  clear,  but  that  it  has  been  a useful  factor  can 
hardly  be  doubted. 

Still  more  important  is  the  gift  for  folk-music  among  the  Germans. 
The  healthy  sturdiness  of  the  ancient  Teuton  — virile,  assertive,  master- 
ful, yet  also  tender,  reflective  and  religious  — continued  for  centuries  to 
express  itself  in  every  sort  of  music  with  an  earnestness  and  grace  that 
have  become  proverbial.  This  was  the  soil  in  which  the  Minnesinger 
flourished.  This  gave  character  to  the  first  German  experiments  with 
counterpoint.  This  determined  the  form  of  the  music  of  the  Reforma- 
tion. Even  now,  in  spite  of  the  prevalence  everywhere  of  more  artistic 
forms,  the  peasantry  in  many  parts  of  Germany  and  in  Switzerland  and 
the  Tyrol  continue  to  cherish  songs  and  dances  that  are  full  of  artless 
charm.  The  value  of  this  to  the  general  art  of  music  cannot  be  com- 
puted. Again  and  again  the  standard  types  of  melody,  harmony  and 
form  have  been  modified  by  the  impress  of  these  humble  styles. 

Somewhat  similar  remarks  might  be  made  about  the  folk-music  of  Ro- 
mance countries  like  Italy  and  Spain,  or  of  the  several  Scandinavian 
countries,  or  of  the  vast  regions  where  the  Slavs  have  gradually  pushed 
their  way  into  the  circle  of  modern  civilization. 

That  which  distinguishes  all  folk-music  is  its  essential  naivete. 
Its  production  is  unconscious,  unstudied,  unfettered  by  rules. 
Although  particular  specimens  often  acquire  a precise  and 


104 


THE  FIFTEENTH  CENTURY 


permanent  shape,  they  can  seldom  be  traced  to  an  individual 
author,  and  their  preservation  does  not  depend  upon  any  pro- 
cess of  transcription.  They  seem  to  spring  up  by  common 
consent,  to  be  perfected  by  common  effort,  and  to  persist  by 
mere  tradition. 

49.  Its  Technical  Features.  — No  attempt  can  be  made  here 
to  indicate  the  peculiarities  of  particular  national  styles,  but 
certain  general  remarks  may  be  offered.  Most  characteristics 
follow  from  the  necessary  simplicity  of  all  folk-music,  which  is 
the  product,  not  of  formal  analysis  or  patient  working  out  on 
paper,  but  of  instinct  and  taste  operating  extempore,  and  which 
depends  for  its  success  upon  the  ease  with  which  it  can  be 
caught,  remembered  and  repeated  by  the  unstudious  mind. 

Folk-songs  are  normally  melodies  of  moderate  length,  laid  out  in  more 
or  less  symmetrical  lines  and  strophes  that  correspond  with  the  plan  of  a 
verse-text.  Each  line  is  usually  somewhat  complete  in  itself,  having  a 
specific  figure  or  pattern  that  ends  with  a cadence  or  1 fall.1  The  lines 
usually  tend  to  form  couplets  or  other  simple  groups  that  are  so  similar  or 
contrasted  that  the  mind  as  easily  associates  them  together  as  it  does 
rhyming  verse-lines.  Usually  the  text  is  in  parallel  stanzas,  all  of  which 
can  be  sung  to  a single  musical  strophe.  Even  in  the  oldest  specimens 
there  is  a tendency  to  adhere  throughout  to  a single  key  or  tonality,  though 
often  with  a clear  perception  of  the  value  of  dominant  closes  in  the  mid- 
dle cadences.  The  kind  of  tonality  preferred  varies  considerably  in  dif- 
ferent countries.  Keltic  and  Scandinavian  songs,  for  example,  show  a 
predilection  for  minor  scales,  sometimes  of  the  pentatonic  variety.  The 
older  French  and  German  songs  are  not  seldom  based  upon  the  mediaeval 
church  modes,  but  as  a rule  drift  toward  the  minor  or  major  as  now  rec- 
ognized. The  evident  appreciation  of  the  major  mode  is  the  more  not- 
able because  found  at  a time  when  scientific  music  was  still  unwilling  to 
desert  the  arbitrary  tone-system  that  it  inherited  from  antiquity.  The 
popular  mind  seems  to  have  had  an  instinct  for  tone-relation  as  we  know 
it  to-day. 

Folk-dances  as  such  are  properly  made  up  of  steps  and  motions  in  brief 
series  of  equal  duration  — following  the  idea,  now  the  basis  of  musical 
1 form,1  that  phrases  should  be  two  or  four  measures  long.  These  figures 
are  sometimes  simply  repeated  over  and  over,  sometimes  strung  together 
in  sets,  making  a kind  of  dance-stanza.  Each  particular  sort  of  dance  is 
characterized  by  some  special  step  or  similar  device.  The  songs  or  in- 
strumental airs  intended  to  accompany  and  guide  these  motions  are  fitted 
to  them  at  every  point,  indicating  musically  what  the  dancer  executes 
orchestically. 

In  both  songs  and  dances  the  fundamental  rhythm  is  emphatic  and 
regular,  either  duple  or  triple,  and  the  phrase-structure  is  so  built  upon  it 
that  the  1 form 1 is  plain  and  easily  kept  in  memory. 


FOLK-MUSIC 


105 


All  these  features  are  of  historic  importance,  since  they  are 
traceable  at  periods  when  formal  composition  was  timidly  grop- 
ing its  way,  and  when  the  supposed  value  of  the  old  modes 
and  of  contrapuntal  structure,  with  its  lack  of  ‘form,’  was 
keeping  musicians  from  these  more  natural  methods.  All  of 
them  were  noted  in  the  Troubadour  and  Minnesinger  periods 
(secs.  37-40),  but  their  decided  influence  belongs  rather  to  the 
15th  and  16th  centuries.  Even  until  1600  some  features  of 
folk-music  seemed  to  educated  musicians  rather  vulgar.  To-day 
we  can  see  that  there  was  no  more  valuable  element  in  the 
evolution  of  modern  styles  than  this  same  despised  music  of  the 
people’s  instinct. 

50.  The  Minstrel  Class.  — Popular  music  in  a settled  com- 
munity involves  a somewhat  organized  class  of  persons  who 
make  their  living  by  it.  Like  the  bards  of  the  older  time,  the 
mediaeval  itinerant  minstrels  constituted  a significant  type. 
Such  rude  musicians  were  the  medium  through  which  folk- 
music  was  disseminated  and  preserved.  By  them  the  songs  and 
dances  of  one  locality  were  mingled  with  those  of  other  places. 
They  often  wrought  what  they  found  into  a finer  shape  or 
added  to  it  from  their  own  invention.  They  were  usually  skill- 
ful players,  and  often  greatly  improved  musical  instruments. 
Their  business  was  not  to  theorize  about  music  or  to  play  the 
role  of  formal  composers,  but  to  render  it  with  voice  and  finger 
so  as  to  make  it  socially  attractive  and  indispensable.  They 
were  bound  to  keep  in  touch  with  strictly  popular  taste.  The 
minstrel,  as  his  name  implies,  was  the  ‘ servant  ’ of  his  audiences. 
Yet,  wherever  he  was  also  something  of  a genius,  he  was  inci- 
dentally a leader  and  teacher  as  well. 

Throughout  the  Middle  Ages  the  popularity  of  traveling  singers  and 
players  is  constantly  indicated.  Perhaps  they  may  have  been  the  suc- 
cessors of  the  tricksters  and  mountebanks  of  the  later  Roman  domination. 
The  line  between  the  clown  and  the  minstrel  proper  was  seldom  sharply 
drawn.  Often  there  was  a strong  prejudice  against  all  such  itinerants  be- 
cause of  their  lawlessness  — a prejudice  that  took  shape  in  edicts,  civil 
and  religious,  which  sometimes  attempted  to  suppress  them  altogether. 
But  the  popular  craving  for  amusement  — all  the  stronger  because  of 
the  hard  and  narrow  conditions  of  life  — gave  them  employment  and  a 
measure  of  wondering  admiration.  Part  of  the  contempt  that  has  pursued 
the  whole  art  of  music  even  to  modern  times  is  due  to  the  mediaeval  asso- 
ciation of  it  with  coarse  buffoonery,  athletic  tricks  and  shows  of  trained 


o6 


THE  FIFTEENTH  CENTURY 


animals.  Vagrant  minstrels  were  too  often  mere  beggars  or  thieves  or 
corrupters  of  public  morals.  Yet  it  is  only  just  to  remember  that  the 
minstrel  class  was  artistically  serviceable  in  many  ways. 

Attention  has  been  called  to  the  guilds  of  the  Meistersinger 
in  Germany  (sec.  41).  Somewhat  similar  institutions  appeared 
much  earlier  in  England,  France  and  the  Low  Countries,  though 
they  were  not  governed  by  such  fantastic  rules,  nor  were  they 
ordinarily  so  secret  and  exclusive.  They  remind  us  of  the  bands 
of  Gipsies  that  still  exist  in  many  parts  of  the  world.  Indeed,  it 
seems  that  between  them  and  the  modern  Gipsies  there  is  some 
real  connection. 

The  earliest  mention  of  a personage  called  ‘ The  King  of  the  Jugglers’ 
is  in  England  at  the  time  of  William  the  Conqueror  (before  1100).  Sev- 
eral such  ‘Kings’  are  named  in  the  13th  century  at  different  places. 
For  over  four  centuries  the  same  title  recurs,  often  with  civil  privileges 
conferred  by  statute.  The  name  implies  the  existence  of  organized  soci- 
eties. Several  such  brotherhoods  are  matters  of  record,  notably  the 
Confririe  de  St.  Julien , first  recognized  in  Paris  in  1331,  and  the  Musicians' 
Company , established  in  London  in  1472,  the  latter  of  which  still  exists  in 
honor.  These  are  but  samples  of  a multitude  of  such  organizations  that 
were  once  common  in  France  and  neighboring  countries,  and  which  varied 
widely  in  character,  from,  the  almost  casual  group  of  mere  itinerants  to  the 
permanent  town  or  city  union  that  assumed  to  dictate  within  its  bounda- 
ries who  could  ply  the  musical  trade  or  profession.  The  connection  of 
these  mediaeval  institutions  with  the  later  guilds  of  town-musicians,  espe- 
cially in  Germany,  can  be  traced  in  considerable  detail,  as  also  with  the 
modern  learned  and  artistic  musical  societies  and  academies  in  various 
lands. 

51.  Instruments.  — Folk-music  and  minstrelsy  were  prolific  in 
the  invention  and  application  of  instruments.  The  multitude 
of  records  here  is  bewildering,  especially  in  illuminations  of 
manuscripts,  architectural  carvings,  and  poetic  and  other  literary 
references.  In  the  search  for  novel  effects  the  variety  of  in- 
strumental forms  in  widespread  use  was  probably  greater  than 
ever  since,  for  with  the  rise  of  scientific  instrument-making  in 
the  17th  century  and  of  real  instrumental  styles  of  composition 
a few  main  types  drove  the  rest  from  the  field.  It  is  likely  that 
dancing  stimulated  this  attention  to  instruments,  since  they  were 
useful  for  marking  its  rhythm  and  figures  and  for  enriching  its 
interest.  But  another  stimulus  was  the  desire  for  genuine  ac- 
companiments for  singing  — a desire  which,  like  the  notion  of 
the  solo  song  itself,  was  lacking  in  the  current  contrapuntal 


FOLK-MUSIC 


107 


system.  There  are  some  indications,  too,  that  independent  in- 
strumental music  was  attempted,  though  this  was  slight. 


No  exhaustive  catalogue  of  mediaeval  instruments  can  be 
given.  The  list  is  too  long  and  complicated.  Various 
shapes  and  names  are  known  to  us,  but  they  cannot  always 
be  brought  together  with  certainty,  and  evidently  both  were 
liable  to  curious  and  capricious  variations.  In  the  stringed 
group  we  find  elementary  forms  of  all  the  well-known  types  — 
harps,  lyres,  dulcimers,  lutes,  viols,  etc.,  in  countless  modi- 
fications, with  peculiar  special  types,  like  the  ‘ trumscheit  ’ 
or  ‘ nun’s-fiddle  ’ — a derivative  of  the  monochord,  and 
the  ‘ organistrum,’  ‘ bauernleier,’  or  1 hurdy-gurdy,’  — essen- 
tially a viol  sounded  by  a revolving  wheel  and  fitted  with 
a rude  keyboard  (see  Fig.  51).  In  the  wind  group,  also, 
there  are  many  representatives  of  the  flute,  oboe  and  trumpet 
families,  with  bagpipes  and  Pan’s-pipes,  besides  the  organ 
and  its  petite  varieties.  In  the  percussive  group  there  are 
drums,  bells,  castanets  and  clappers  of  all  sorts.  The  key- 
board as  a means  of  controlling  a complex  instrument  like 
the  organ  was  already  well  known  (see  sec.  101),  and  its 
application  to  stringed  instruments  of  the  lyre  or  viol  kind 
was  understood,  though  it  had  not  been  combined  with 
the  dulcimer  as  in  the  pianoforte.  All  these  instruments, 
except  the  organ,  were  mainly  the  products  of  popular  in- 
genuity, though  at  the  end  of  the  15th  century  they  began 
to  engage  the  serious  attention  of  thoughtful  musicians. 

The  more  favorite  instruments  were  often  made  in 
several  sizes,  so  that  of  each  there  might  be  a graded 
series  from  treble  to  bass,  making  an  instrumental 
choir.  It  seems  that  before  learned  musicians  had 
fixed  upon  the  notion  of  true  harmony  as  the  basis  of 
composition  popular  music  had  recognized  it  and  had 
begun  to  apply  it  in  solid  chord-effects  from  instru- 
ments of  differing  pitch.  Similar  experiments  were 
of  course  made  with  voices.  Such  efforts  were  essen-  s JHhng’  °n 
tially  diverse  from  those  of  true  counterpoint,  since  dies  could  be 
the  several  voice-parts  were  not  developed  indepen-  played  by  se- 
dently  or  equally,  but  as  constituents  in  the  massive  from^he01^- 
or  total  effect.  It  would  appear,  therefore,  that  the  ries  of  natural 
mediaeval  eagerness  for  concerted  instrumental  effects  harmonlcs- 
is  memorable,  not  simply  because  it  hastened  the  maturity  of 
leading  solo  instruments,  like  the  violin,  but  because  it  involved 
some  recognition  of  true  harmony  as  distinct  from  counterpoint. 


Fig.  52.— 
N u n’s  - f i d- 
dle,  with  one 


io8 


THE  FIFTEENTH  CENTURY 


52.  Tablatures.  — Incidental  to  the  free  use  of  instruments 
were  systems  of  notation  for  them,  called  ‘tablatures.’  Several 
systems  were  in  wide  use,  varying  with  the  instrument  in  view 
and  also  with  the  country  of  their  origin.  They  were  alike  in 
that  they  did  not  employ  the  staff,  which  belonged  to  vocal 
music.  Yet  the  experiments  with  tablatures  evidently  had 
much  to  do  with  the  perfecting  of  the  staff-notation.  Indeed, 
the  latter  is  essentially  a kind  of  tablature,  whose  ultimate 
supremacy  is  due  to  its  adaptability  to  every  species  of  music, 
instrumental  as  well  as  vocal. 

What  was  called  German  or  organ  tablature  was  meant  for  keyboard 
instruments  generally,  and  consisted  of  the  letter-names  of  the  intended 
tones  written  in  horizontal  lines  that  were  broken  at  regular  intervals  by 
vertical  bars  to  mark  the  measures  — the  whole  resembling  the  modern 
Tonic  Sol-Fa  notation,  except  that  the  letters  referred  to  the  keys  of  the 
keyboard  and  not  to  solmization-syllables.  Notes  meant  to  be  sounded 
together  were  ranged  one  above  the  other,  and  over  each  vertical  column 
stood  a sign  to  indicate  the  desired  duration  (a  point  for  a breve,  a stroke 
for  a semibreve,  a stroke  with  a side-pennant  or  hook  for  a minim,  one 
with  two  hooks  for  a crotchet,  etc. — all  these  signs  being  transitional 
forms  from  the  old  mensural  notation).  Rests  were  shown  by  dashes  in 
the  part  where  they  were  needed,  with  a duration-sign  as  before. 

For  other  instruments,  especially  the  lute,  the  same  general  scheme  was 
used,  but  the  notes  were  named,  not  by  their  letter-names,  but  by  some 
letter  or  other  character  indicating  what  string  and  what  finger  were  to 
be  used.  In  these  latter  forms  what  looked  like  a staff  was  often  em- 
ployed, but  its  lines  referred  to  the  strings  of  the  instrument,  all  the  notes 
to  be  played  on  a given  string  being  marked  by  letters  on  its  particular 
line. 


T 

T 

• 

p 

1 

s 

1 

0 

I-  p 
P 9 

1 1 

»» 

f 

J* 

1 

1 1 

0 u? 

i 

1 

• 

! 

1 

# 

• 

1 

l 

\ 

1.  f t 

C 

g 

Z 

c 

r 

k 

d 

h 

1 fk 

d 

0 d J* 

|.  ft 

1 

1 

ppp  p 

1 

1 

, 1 f 

PPfP 

1 1 

1 

ffftPP 

'0  4 ) i* 

D 

O 

a 

O 

£ c 3 

co  do 

} d 

JL 

c 

nVdoij.c 

V) 

1 

1 

ppp 

1 p 

1 r » 

1 r 

r?n 

1 

1 

I I 

z? 

] 

f 

zPPz  g 

pf 

z 

Pi  1 

zfJtc 

cmgm 

c 

g 

z c 

Fig.  53.  — Lute  Tablature  (16th  century). 


PART  III 


THE  SIXTEENTH  CENTURY 


PART  III 


THE  SIXTEENTH  CENTURY 

Chap.  VII.  The  Venetian  and  Roman  Schools. 

53.  General  Survey. 

54.  Music-Printing. 

55.  The  Rise  of  Italian  Music. 

56.  Willaert  and  the  Venetian  School. 

57.  Other  North  Italian  Masters. 

58.  The  Papal  Chapel. 

59.  Palestrina. 

60.  Other  Roman  Masters. 

Chap.  VIII.  Church  Music  in  Northern  and  Western  Europe. 

61.  In  General. 

62.  The  Lutheran  Reformation. 

63.  The  Imperial  Chapel. 

64.  Lassus  and  the  South  German  Masters. 

65.  France  and  Spain. 

66.  The  Netherlands. 

67.  England. 

68.  The  Prayer  Book  and  Music. 

Chap.  IX.  Secular  Music.  Instruments.  Theory. 

69.  The  Madrigal  and  Part-Song. 

70.  The  Florentine  Monodies. 

71.  Instruments  and  Instrumental  Music. 

72.  Literature  about  Music. 

73.  Summary  of  the  Century. 


no 


CHAPTER  VII 


THE  VENETIAN  AND  ROMAN  SCHOOLS 

53.  General  Survey.  — The  16th  century  is  perhaps  the  most 
fascinating  of  any  before  the  19th,  since  it  was  the  meetingr 
point  of  mediaeval  and  modern  life.  Into  it  as  towards  a focus 
various  lines  of  progress  converged,  only  to  be  recombined  and 
redirected.  All  Europe  was  stirred  by  the  great  mental  move- 
ments of  the  Renaissance  and  the  Revival  of  Letters,  which 
originated  further  back,  but  were  now  hastened  to  maturity  by 
certain  events  that  gave  an  unexampled  expansion  to  intellectual 
and  artistic  interests. 

Note  especially  ( a ) the  Fall  of  Constantinople  in  1453,  which  sent  a 
wave  of  Byzantine  learning  into  the  West,  making  real  the  richness  of 
ancient  literature  and  art,  (b)  the  invention  of  printing  with  movable 
types  about  1450,  making  it  possible  to  multiply  and  distribute  the  tools 
of  culture  indefinitely,  (c)  other  inventions  that  tended  to  alter  society, 
like  gunpowder,  changing  the  whole  aspect  of  war  and  politics,  and  the 
mariner’s  compass,  opening  the  door  to  explorations  beyond  the  sea,  and 
(, d ) startling  discoveries  of  far-off  geographical  facts,  as  of  America 
(1492),  the  Cape  of  Good  Hope  and  the  sea-route  to  India  (1498),  the 
Pacific  (1513),  etc.,  enlarging  men’s  horizons,  awakening  adventurous 
zeal,  and  provoking  dreams  of  foreign  domain  and  fabulous  wealth. 

In  place  of  the  stiff  and  abstract  scholasticism  of  the  Middle 
Ages  the  New  Learning  now  asserted  itself,  being  really  the 
first  expression  of  the  modern  historical  and  scientific  spirit. 
Other  signs  of  the  mental  vigor  of  the  age  were  the  advances 
of  arts  like  painting  and  poetry  under  masters  of  permanent 
importance. 

As  illustrations,  note  that  Erasmus,  the  leader  of  the  Humanists,  was 
born  in  1465  and  died  in  1536,  that  here  belong  typical  Italian  painters 
of  the  first  rank,  like  Da  Vinci  (1452-15 19),  Michelangelo  (1475-1564), 
Raphael  (1483-1520)  and  Titian  (1477-1576),  with  the  German  Durer 
(1471-1528),  and  that  here  was  the  brilliant  blossoming  of  the  Eliza- 
bethan Era  in  England. 

As  the  century  opens,  we  find  ourselves  on  the  verge  of  the 
tremendous  upheaval  of  the  Reformation,  appearing  just  before 


11 


THE  SIXTEENTH  CENTURY 


1 12 

1520  in  Germany  and  Switzerland.  As  this  movement  spread 
in  northern  and  western  Europe,  besides  its  theological  and  re- 
ligious effects,  it  produced  extraordinary  political,  social,  liter- 
ary and  artistic  results,  stirring  all  society  to  the  depths. 

The  century  was  an  age  of  great  sovereigns,  like  Charles  V.,  Emperor 
in  1518-56,  Francis  I.,  King  of  France  in  1515-47,  Henry  VIII.,  King  of 
England  in  1509-47,  Philip  II.,  King  of  Spain  in  1 556—98,  and  Elizabeth, 
Queen  of  England  in  1558-1603.  The  relations  of  these  to  the  power  of 
the  Papacy  and  to  Protestantism  were  often  extremely  important  to  the 
progress  of  all  culture. 

It  is  not  strange  that  the  century  was  rich  in  musical  signifi- 
cance. The  great  musical  events  were  the  application  of  print- 
ing to  the  reproduction  of  music,  the  culmination  of  the  art  of 
mediaeval  counterpoint,  the  rise  of  Protestant  church  music, 
the  obliteration  of  the  old  line  between  sacred  and  secular 
music,  the  shift  of  emphasis  in  theory  from  polyphony  to  mono- 
phony, with  a new  sense  of  harmony  and  of  ‘form,’  and  the 
discovery  of  the  musical  drama,  with  its  emotional  possibilities. 

In  these  developments  several  countries  participated,  but  Italy  easily 
leads  in  all  but  one.  Although  the  impetus  everywhere  is  largely  from 
Netherlanders,  native  genius  comes  steadily  to  the  front.  Germany  and 
England  compete  with  Italy  for  attention,  while  France  and  the  Low 
Countries  are  less  important. 

Individual  composers  and  theorists  now  exert  a wider  and 
more  lasting  influence,  especially  since  musical  publication  be- 
comes a potent  factor  in  progress.  Their  dignity  and  worth 
as  members  of  society  are  better  recognized,  and  the  variety  of 
demands  upon  them  increases.  The  manufacture  of  instru- 
ments, also,  now  begins  to  afford  room  for  the  exercise  of  positive 
genius. 

The  dependence  of  music  upon  the  Church  and  upon  the  patronage  of 
rulers  continues,  but  there  are  signs  that  the  art  in  its  higher  forms  is 
coming  closer  to  the  people  generally.  Just  as  it  is  becoming  more 
cosmopolitan,  so  it  is  also  becoming  more  evidently  democratic. 

54.  Music-Printing.  — No  single  event  in  the  evolution  of  mu- 
sic in  its  social  applications  is  more  important  than  the  inven- 
tion of  a practical  method  of  printing  its  products.  The  same 
men  who  conceived  the  notion  of  movable  types  for  letters  ad- 
vanced almost  at  once  to  that  of  movable  types  for  notes,  and, 
just  as  the  use  of  typography  led  immediately  to  book-publish 


MUSIC-PRINTING 


113 

ing  and  book-selling  as  standard  branches  of  commerce,  so  it  led 
also  to  music-publishing  and  music-selling.  The  value  of  this 
new  agency  was  at  once  apparent.  Though  the  early  editions 
were  small  and  the  copies  relatively  expensive,  yet  through 
them  masterworks  now  began  to  circulate  in  authentic  form 
and  to  be  studied  and  used  as  never  before.  An  immense  in- 
centive was  thus  supplied  both  to  producers  and  to  users. 

Throughout  the  Middle  Ages  the  drafting  of  musical  manuscripts  and 
even  the  pursuit  of  musical  calligraphy  as  an  art  were  common  occu- 
pations in  monasteries  and  similar  institutions.  Every  cathedral  and 
large  church  was  obliged  to  supply  its  priests  and  choir  with  all  needed 
service-books,  which  were  often  marvels  of  laborious  patience  and  inter- 
est. But  the  time  and  effort  required  upon  them  were  excessive,  so 
that  they  were  costly  or  priceless.  Naturally  there  was  no  effort  to  cir- 
culate them.  The  knowledge  of  the  larger  musical  works  was  therefore 
limited  to  a few  places  and  persons. 

To  relieve  this  difficulty,  experiments  were  made  in  the  15th  century 
with  printing  music  from  engraved  wooden  blocks,  a whole  page  to  a 
block.  When  movable  types  were  first  tried  for  letters  by  Gutenberg 
(c.  1440),  the  question  at  once  arose  whether  the  same  device  was  not 
practicable  for  music,  but  the  extreme  difficulty  of  printing  both  staffs  and 
notes  at  one  impression  postponed  the  solution  of  the  problem.  For  a 
time  the  musical  portions  of  books  like  missals  were  printed  from  blocks 
while  the  text  was  printed  from  type,  and  this  continued  till  1520  and 
occasionally  after. 

The  earliest  known  printing  of  music  from  types  was  in  1476 
by  Ulrich  Hahn  of  Rome,  in  1481  by  Jorg  Reyser  of  Wurzburg 
and  Ottavio  Scotto  of  Venice,  and  during  the  next  twenty  years 
by  several  others.  In  all  these  cases  only  Plain-Song  was  at- 
tempted, and  the  process  involved  two  impressions,  the  staffs 
being  in  red,  the  notes  in  black.  The  first  application  of  this 
process  to  the  more  difficult  problem  of  contrapuntal  music 
was  in  1501  by  Petrucci  of  Venice,  followed  in  1507  by  Oeglin 
of  Augsburg,  and  before  1512  by  Schoffer  of  Mayence.  The 
first  to  work  out  a one-impression  process,  notes  and  staffs  to- 
gether, was  the  type-maker  Pierre  Haultin  in  1525,  whose  types 
were  used  from  1527  by  Attaignant  of  Paris.  Further  progress 
consisted  in  devising  better  types  (as,  for  example,  the  round- 
headed  notes  invented  in  1530  by  Briard  of  Avignon).  The 
publishing  of  music  as  a trade  was  now  undertaken  in  various 
places.  Venice,  being  the  chief  centre  of  publishing  in  general, 


4 


THE  SIXTEENTH  CENTURY 


was  naturally  prominent,  but  many  other  cities  took  up  the  new 
industry  with  success. 

The  mechanical  difficulties  of  music-printing  are  not  generally  appre- 
ciated. The  staff-lines  should  be  continuous  across  the  page,  and  yet 
upon  and  between  them  must  stand  notes  and  other  signs.  It  is  easy  to 
make  uniform  types  for  all  the  latter,  but  not  easy  to  apply  them  without 
breaking  the  lines.  Making  two  impressions  not  only  increases  cost,  but 
is  mechanically  delicate,  since  even  a small  variation  in  1 register  1 (loca- 
tion on  the  paper)  between  the  two  printings  vitiates  the  result.  Petrucci’s 
success  with  this  method  is  extraordinary  in  view  of  the  fact  that  even  on 
modern  presses  it  is  practically  abandoned.  The  problem  was  solved  by 
making  the  types  for  notes,  bars  and  other  characters  with  small  portions 
of  the  staff-lines  attached  to  them  (in  all  desired  combinations)  and  then 
setting  these,  with  other  types  for  the  remaining  portions  of  the  staffs,  in  a 
complicated  mosaic,  so  exact  in  adjustment  and  so  closely  compacted  that 
when  the  whole  is  inked  and  applied  to  the  paper,  both  notes  and  staffs 
are  produced  in  apparent  continuity  and  perfection.  (See  an  excellent 
account  in  Grove’s  Diet,  under  1 Music-Printing.1) 

The  above  remarks  apply  only  to  printing  from  types,  which  can  be  cast 
in  large  quantities,  set  up  in  any  desired  combination,  printed  from,  and 
then  separated  or  1 distributed  1 so  as  to  be  used  again  in  other  combina- 
tions. To-day  this  process  is  employed  mainly  for  books  containing  much 
literary  matter  or  ‘ letter-press.’  Sheet-music  is  usually  printed  from 
engraved  plates  — a wholly  different  process,  which  also  began  to  be  used 
in  the  i6th  century  (by  Verovio  of  Rome  in  1586).  The  first  plates 
were  made  of  copper  and  the  engraving  was  laborious.  The  modern  plan 
of  using  soft-metal  plates  and  punching  the  notes  and  other  characters  by 
dies  did  not  appear  till  about  1700. 

As  a clue  to  the  spread  of  the  new  art  and  a help  to  tracing  the  many  collec- 
tions thus  put  into  circulation,  some  of  the  pioneers  may  be  enumerated : — 

At  Venice  we  have  Ottaviano  dei  Petrucci  (d.  1539),  born  at  Fossombrone 
in  1466,  who  went  to  Venice  in  1491,  secured  a monopoly  of  music-printing 
there  in  1498,  issuing  his  first  book  in  1501,  and  returned  to  his  birthplace  in 
1 5 1 1 , where  he  prosecuted  work  till  1523,  completing  a monumental  series  of 
over  30  collections  of  masses,  motets,  frottole  and  pieces  for  the  lute  (some  in 
more  than  one  volume  or  edition)  by  a great  variety  of  composers ; Andrea 
Antigo  (d.  1539),  who  began  at  Rome  in  1510,  but  moved  to  Venice  in  1520; 
Girolamo  Scotto  (d.  1573),  from  1539  one  of  the  most  prolific  publishers  of  the 
time,  as  well  as  a composer  of  madrigals  and  canzone ; Antonio  Gardano,  who 
began  business  in  1537,  was  soon  in  fierce  competition  with  Scotto,  and  was 
succeeded  in  1571  by  his  almost  equally  enterprising  son  Angelo  (d.  1610)  ; 
and  Francesco  Rampazetto  (d.  1579),  at  work  from  about  1562.  At  Rome 
we  note  Valerio  Dorico  (d.  1567),  with  two  books  in  1 531—3  ; Antonio  Barre, 
at  work  in  1555-8  ; Alessandro  Gardano  (d.  1623),  son  of  Antonio  above,  at 
work  in  1584-91  ; and  Simone  Verovio,  at  work  (with  his  copper-plate  process) 
in  1586-1604. 


MUSIC-PRINTING 


15 


In  Germany  we  have  at  Augsburg  Erhart  Oeglin,  whose  first  book  in  1507 
was  printed  from  wooden  type  and  another  in  1512  from  copper  type,  the 
latter  being  a collection  of  folk-songs  — the  first  of  many  by  other  printers. 
At  Mayence  Peter  Schoffer  first  appeared  as  the  colleague  of  Gutenberg  and 
Faust  in  general  printing,  but  turned  to  music-printing  before  1512,  after  which 
he  worked  first  at  Worms,  issuing  one  of  the  earliest  Protestant  hymn-books 
in  1525,  and  from  1534  at  Strassburg.  At  Wittenberg  was  another  important 
Protestant  publisher,  Georg  Rhaw  (d.  1548),  who  began  business  in  1525. 
At  Nuremberg  were  many  printers,  like  Johannes  Petreius  (d.  1550),  at  work 
from  1536,  Johann  vom  Berg  (d.  1563)  and  Ulrich  Neuber  (d.  1571),  a firm 
whose  first  book  was  issued  in  1531,  Hans  Ott  (d.  1550?)  and  Hieronymus 
Grapheus  (d.  1556),  another  firm  nearly  as  old,  and  Dietrich  Gerlach  (d. 
1 575),  beginning  about  1566.  At  Frankfort  mention  should  be  made  of 
Christian  Egenolff  (d.  1555),  at  work  from  1532,  whose  technique  was  no- 
toriously poor,  but  whose  books  are  historically  valuable.  At  Munich  Adam 
Berg  was  diligently  at  work  in  1567-99. 

In  France  music-printers  were  notable  for  zeal  in  the  improved  cutting  of 
types  as  well  as  for  their  work  as  publishers.  Pierre  Haultin  (d.  1580),  be- 
ginning work  at  Paris  in  1 525,  was  followed  at  Avignon  by  Etienne  Briard 
and  Jean  de  Channay,  and  later  at  Paris  by  Guillaume  Le  Be.  Robert  Granjon, 
at  work  from  about  the  same  date,  published  books  at  Lyons  in  1559  and  at 
Rome  in  1582.  At  Paris  Pierre  Attaignant  used  Haultin’s  types  in  1527-49, 
followed  by  Nicholas  du  Chemin  in  1549-68,  and  Adrien  Le  Roy  (d.  1599),  a 
lutist  and  composer,  who  began  publishing  in  1540,  and  from  1552  was  joined 
by  Robert  Ballard  (d.  1606),  the  first  of  a family  of  publishers  that  lasted  till  the 
19th  century. 

In  the  Netherlands  a prominent  name  at  Antwerp  is  that  of  Tylman  Susato 
(d.  1564),  whose  work  began  in  1543,  succeeded  in  1572  by  Jean  Bellere  (d. 
1595)  and  his  partner  Pierre  Phalese  (d.  c.  1579),  the  latter  having  worked  at 
Louvain  from  1545. 

In  England  slight  specimens  of  musical  typography  are  traceable  as  early 
as  1495.  Petrucci’s  two-impression  process  began  to  be  imitated  in  1530, 
apparently  by  Wynkyn  de  Worde.  The  Prayer  Book  with  music  was  printed 
in  1550  and  the  metrical  Psalter  in  1562.  In  1575  Tallis  (d.  1585)  and  his 
pupil  Byrd  (d.  1623)  secured  a monopoly,  and  they  were  followed  in  1588  by 
Thomas  Este  (d.  1609  ?)  and  others. 

55.  The  Rise  of  Italian  Music.  — Between  the  strictly  Nether- 
land  writers  of  the  15th  century  and  those  of  the  16th  in  other 
countries  there  was  no  absolute  line  of  separation,  though  the 
divergences  gradually  became  marked.  The  transfer  of  activity 
to  Italy  and  Germany  was  made  by  those  who  were  either 
Netherlanders  themselves  or  their  pupils.  But  at  once  the  line 
of  progress  was  taken  up  by  others  and  carried  forward  with 
increasing  independence.  In  Italy  we  now  note  two  large 
groups,  set  apart  geographically  and  artistically.  These  centre 


THE  SIXTEENTH  CENTURY 


1 16 

about  Venice  and  Rome  respectively.  Both  served  to  develop 
the  Netherland  art,  but  in  different  directions.  The  Roman 
school  adhered  to  the  stricter  traditions,  dominated  by  the 
demands  of  the  Church,  while  the  Venetians  were  far  more 
ready  for  innovation,  especially  in  secular  and  sensational  ef- 
fects. The  former  brought  the  older  style  to  its  natural  con- 
summation ; the  latter  laid  foundations  for  new  developments. 

There  was  an  increasing  differentiation  of  the  forms  of  composition. 
These  were  all  essentially  polyphonic,  though  varying  greatly  in  elabora- 
tion, and  all  at  first  vocal,  though  soon  instrumental  forms  begin  to 
appear. 

For  the  church  service  the  ‘mass1  was  of  course  the  most  stately  and 
constant  form,  and  its  treatment  followed  the  traditions  of  the  15th 
century,  though  with  some  technical  modifications.  But  the  ‘ motet 1 was 
now  more  appreciated,  since  its  variety  of  text  encouraged  originality  of 
treatment.  For  both  of  these  the  words  were  Latin,  and  the  handling 
was  clearly  contrapuntal,  usually  learned  and  intricate,  avoiding  the  ex- 
treme or  the  sensational  (but  see  sec.  44). 

In  secular  writing  the  ‘madrigal1  was  the  analogue  of  the  motet  — a 
finished  contrapuntal  setting  of  secular  words,  often  in  Italian  and  usually 
amatory,  into  which  gradually  crept  qualities  of  sensuous  piquancy  and 
lightness  that  were  out  of  place  in  sacred  writing.  The  old  French 
chanson,  also,  was  followed  in  Italy  by  the  ‘canzona1  or  popular  part-song 
(often  called  by  local  names,  as  Venetian,  Neapolitan  or  Sicilian,  accord- 
ing to  the  style  adopted),  having  much  more  freedom  and  outward  charm 
than  the  madrigal.  Next  came  the  ‘frottola,1  a variety  of  the  canzona, 
usually  following  a fixed  plan  of  stanza  with  a refrain.  This  shaded  off 
into  the  ‘ villanella 1 or  street-song,  often  with  a rough  and  even  coarse  text, 
a prominent  melody  and  comparatively  little  attempt  at  part-writing. 
These  latter  forms,  though  often  despised,  were  beneficial  in  breaking  up 
the  heaviness  and  formlessness  of  stricter  writing  (see  sec.  69). 

As  instrumental  writing  was  taken  up,  several  names  were  used  that 
were  not  at  first  clearly  distinguished,  all  of  them  referring  to  pieces  in 
which  some  thematic  treatment  was  decorated  with  much  aimless  pas- 
sage-work and  the  like.  Sometimes  the  term  ‘ fantasia 1 was  used  much 
as  now,  but  ‘ ricercare,1  ‘ toccata1  or  ‘ sonata1  were  more  common.  Stricter 
pieces  were  occasionally  given  the  name  ‘fuga,1  though  the  true  fugue 
hardly  began  before  the  17th  century. 

56.  Willaert  and  the  Venetian  School.  — For  various  reasons 
Venice  stands  out  in  the  16th  century  as  one  of  the  most  inter- 
esting cities.  She  had  long  been  foremost  in  commerce,  her 
trade  reaching  far  into  the  Orient  on  the  one  side  and  over  all 
western  Europe  on  the  other.  With  her  wealth  came  an  ag- 

gressive and  productive  culture.  Notable  among  her  national 


THE  VENETIAN  SCHOOL 


ii ; 

institutions  was  the  Church  of  St.  Mark’s,  founded  in  the  9th 
century,  and,  from  the  nth,  famous  as  one  of  the  richest  and 
most  splendid  of  cathedrals.  Here  the  powerful  patronage  of 
the  state  developed  a musical  establishment  that  in  the  16th 
century  attained  fame  in  all  Europe. 

The  excellence  of  the  music  at  St.  Mark’s  first  became  notable  in  the  14th 
century.  The  successive  organists  after  1400  were  Zuane  (1406-19),  Bernar- 
dino (1419-45),  Bernardo  di  Stefanino  Murer  (1445-59),  Bartolommeo  Vielmis 
(1459-90  and  later),  Francesco  d’  Ana  (1490-  ?),  Zuan  Maria  (1504-7),  Baldas- 
sare  da  Imola  (1533-41),  Jachet  de  Buus  (1541-51),  Annibale  (1552-66), 
Merulo  (1557-84),  Andrea  Gabrieli  (1556-86),  Giovanni  Gabrieli  (1585-1612), 
Vincenzo  Bell’Haver  (1586-88)  and  Gioseffo  Guami  (1588-91).  From  1490 
there  were  two  organs,  and  the  overlapping  dates  above  signify  terms  of 
service  beginning  on  the  second  organ  and  passing  to  the  first.  The  list  of 
choirmasters  begins  in  1491  and  includes  Pietro  de  Fossis,  a Netherlander 
( 1 49 1—1525),  Willaert  (1527-62),  De  Rore  (1559-65),  Zarlino  (1565-90)  and 
Donato  (1590-1603).  From  1403  there  was  a special  school  for  choristers. 

The  peculiar  eminence  of  Venice  in  the  early  16th  century 
was  due  to  the  extraordinary  genius  of  Willaert,  choirmaster  at 
St.  Mark’s  for  thirty-five  years  from  1527,  who  is  commonly 
called  the  founder  of  the  Venetian  school.  In  all  the  technical 
mysteries  of  counterpoint  he  was  fully  as  expert  as  his  prede- 
cessors, while  he  excelled  in  interesting  extensions  of  their  style. 
Chief  of  these  advances  was  the  free  use  of  double-choir  effects, 
probably  suggested  by  the  fact  that  St.  Mark’s  had  two  organs 
facing  one  another  across  the  chancel.  Antiphony  of  this 
kind  involved  important  changes  in  current  method  — partition 
into  sections,  with  some  symmetry  between  them,  more  clear 
cadences,  more  massing  of  voices  in  pure  harmony,  conciser 
handling  of  the  words,  etc.  Progress  in  all  these  was  novel 
and  a grateful  addition  to  the  older  procedures.  In  general,  emo- 
tional effects  were  pushed  forward,  with  richer  combinations  of 
chords  and  more  freedom  with  chromatic  tones,  while  mere  pre- 
cision or  intricacy  of  imitation  was  less  prominent.  In  all  this 
we  see  the  working  of  the  typical  Italian  love  of  color,  warmth 
and  sentiment.  Though  not  the  first  to  grasp  the  possibilities 
of  the  madrigal-form,  Willaert  was  one  of  the  first  strong 
writers  in  it,  exercising  a dominant  influence  on  its  develop- 
ment (see  sec.  69).  For  all  these  reasons  Willaert  is  counted 
as,  on  the  whole,  the  ablest  master  between  Des  Pres  and 
Palestrina, 


i8 


THE  SIXTEENTH  CENTURY 


Adrian  Willaert  (d.  1562)  was  born  at  Bruges  or  Roulers  before  1490.  His 
first  training  was  at  Paris  and  for  the  law,  but  he  also  studied  music  with 
Mouton  and  Des  Pres  to  such  effect  that  in  1516,  when  he  went  to  Rome,  it  is 
said  that  he  found  the  Papal  Choir  using  a motet  of  his  under  Des  Pres’  name. 
After  some  years,  of  which  we  have  no  record  save  that  he  was  employed  for  a 
time  by  Louis  II.  of  Bohemia,  in  1527,  the  Doge  of  Venice,  in  the  face  of  some 
opposition,  installed  him  as  choirmaster  at  St.  Mark’s,  where  he  remained 
in  the  greatest  honor  till  his  death.  In  1542  and  1556  he  paid  visits  to  the 
Low  Countries.  He  was  in  request  as  a teacher  and  trained  a long  list 
of  talented  pupils.  His  published  works  (1536-71)  include  only  5 masses, 
but  are  rich  in  motets,  hymns,  etc.,  for  the  church  and  very  numerous  secular 
part-songs  and  madrigals,  besides  some  instrumental  ricercari.  Further 
masses,  motets  and  songs  were  left  in  MS. 

In  following  down  the  long  line  of  Willaert’s  contemporaries 
and  successors  at  Venice  we  note  the  recurrence  in  their  works 
of  the  same  tendencies  of  style,  with  many  individual  peculiari- 
ties as  well.  The  drift  was  strong  toward  such  uses  of  contra- 
puntal art  as  should  be  less  diffuse  and  abstruse  than  formerly, 
with  emphasis  upon  depth  of  feeling,  charm  of  detail,  richness 
of  impression,  in  place  of  the  older  delight  in  puzzle-working. 
The  potent  influence  of  secular  music  was  taking  hold  of  all 
music,  rendering  its  more  studied  products  more  beautiful  and 
human. 

Jachet  de  Buus  was  certainly  a Netherlander.  He  came  early  to  Venice 
and  in  1541  was  chosen  from  many  competitors  for  the  second  organ  at  St. 
Mark’s,  whence  in  1551  he  went  to  Vienna,  and  became  court-organist  there, 
remaining  in  service  till  1564.  He  is  notable  as  one  of  the  earlier  writers  for 
the  organ.  His  works  (1543-50)  consist  of  some  canzone,  ricercari,  and 
motets. 

Ciprian  de  Rore  (d.  1565),  also  a Netherlander,  born  at  Mechlin  or  Ant- 
werp in  1516,  was  brought  up  as  a choirboy  at  St.  Mark’s  as  one  of  Willaert’s 
earlier  pupils.  He  began  to  publish  madrigals  in  1542.  Before  1553  he  was 
made  choirmaster  at  Ferrara,  but  in  1558  returned  to  the  Low  Countries, 
spending  some  time  at  Antwerp  and  Brussels.  There  he  was  sought  as 
choirmaster  by  the  Duke  of  Parma,  but  in  1563  became  Willaert’s  successor 
at  Venice.  The  next  year,  being  discontented  with  his  post,  he  moved  to 
Parma,  where  he  died.  His  long  series  of  works  (1542-73)  includes  several 
masses,  many  motets,  an  abundance  of  beautiful  madrigals  for  4-5  voices,  and 
some  ricercari.  Their  popularity  is  shown  by  the  numerous  editions  de- 
manded. He  went  much  beyond  his  master  and  his  school  in  the  free  and 
dexterous  use  of  chromatic  tones  and  harmonies,  and  his  style  has  a novel 
richness  and  geniality. 

Gioseffo  Zarlino  (d.  1590)  was  born  in  1517  at  Chioggia.  After  training  as 
a Franciscan,  he  came  in  1541  to  Venice,  studied  under  Willaert,  and  in  1565 
succeeded  De  Rore  as  choirmaster,  serving  25  years.  There  is  no  doubt  that 


THE  VENETIAN  SCHOOL 


19 


he  was  eminent  as  a composer,  but  comparatively  few  of  his  works  remain 
(motets  and  madrigals,  1548-70).  His  chief  fame  is  as  a theorist  (see  sec.  72). 

Annibale  Padovano  was  born  in  1527  at  Padua,  succeeded  De  Buus  as 
organist  at  St.  Mark’s  in  1552,  and  remained  till  1566,  when  he  became 
ducal  choirmaster  at  Gratz  (Austria).  He  had  great  repute  as  a player  on 
the  organ  and  other  instruments.  His  relatively  few  works,  in  all  the  usual 
forms,  appeared  in  1556-73,  with  a probably  posthumous  collection  of  organ- 
toccate  and  ricercari  in  1604. 

Baldassare  Donato  (d.  1603)  was  a Venetian  who  seems  to  have  spent  his 
entire  life  at  St.  Mark’s,  first  as  singer,  from  1562  as  trainer,  and  finally,  from 
1 590,  as  Zarlino’s  successor.  Most  of  his  known  works  are  madrigals  ( 1 5 50-68), 
in  which  much  originality  appears,  with  one  book  of  motets  (1597).  The  long 
gap  between  these  publications  is  unexplained. 

Claudio  Merulo  (d.  1604),  born  in  1533  at  Correggio  and  trained  there, 
early  displayed  conspicuous  genius.  He  began  his  career  in  1556  as  cathedral- 
organist  at  Brescia,  in  1557  came  to  the  second  organ  at  St.  Mark’s,  was  pro- 
moted to  the  first  in  1566,  remaining  almost  20  years,  and  in  1586  began 
another  20  years’  service  as  court-organist  at  Parma,  where  he  died.  Besides 
being  interested  (from  1566)  in  music-publishing  and  in  organ-building,  he 
stands  out  as  one  of  the  chief  organists  of  the  period,  excelling  both  as  player 
and  as  composer.  With  the  two  Gabrielis,  he  marks  an  epoch  in  the  separa- 
tion of  organ  from  vocal  music.  His  masses,  motets  and  excellent  madrigals 
are  many  (from  1564),  but  his  best  works  are  his  organ-ricercari,  toccate  and 
canzone.  In  1 579  he  cooperated  in  the  drafting  of  a madrigal-play,  one  of 
the  precursors  of  the  opera. 

Andrea  Gabrieli  (d.  1586),  born  in  Venice  about  1510  and  trained  by 
Willaert,  became  a singer  at  St.  Mark’s  in  1536  and  second  organist  in  1566. 
Like  his  younger  predecessor  Merulo,  his  fame  rests  upon  the  stimulus  he 
gave  to  organ  music,  but  his  publications  were  at  first  all  vocal  (several  vol- 
umes of  motets,  masses  and  madrigals  from  1565),  while  his  concerti  and 
organ-pieces  appeared  posthumously  (1587-1605).  He  wrote  much  for  5-6 
voices  or  more  — his  Penitential  Psalms  for  6 voices  (1583)  being  specially 
notable.  He  also  collaborated  on  a madrigal-play  (1574).  Among  his 
eminent  pupils  were  his  nephew  Giovanni  and  Hassler,  the  South  German 
pioneer.  The  new  forms  of  organ-writing  later  conspicuous  in  Germany  are 
finely  prefigured  in  his  works. 

Giovanni  Gabrieli  (d.  1612),  Andrea’s  nephew  and  pupil,  born  in  Venice 
in  1557  and  first  organist  at  St.  Mark’s  from  1585,  stands  on  the  same  high 
plane  as  player,  composer  and  teacher.  His  published  works  appeared  first 
(from  1587)  with  those  of  his  uncle.  He  was  fond  of  polychoric  effects  (3-4 
choirs  treated  more  or  less  independently),  and  in  his  organ-writing  ad- 
vanced toward  the  fugal  form  with  success.  He  seems  not  to  have  produced 
much  secular  music,  but  he  had  a profound  sense  of  richness  and  variety  of 
tonal  effect.  His  most  famous  pupils  were  Sweelinck,  the  founder  of  the 
North  German  school,  and  Schiitz,  the  great  Dresden  master. 

Giovanni  Croce  of  Chioggia  (d.  1609)  was  first  a choirboy  at  St.  Mark’s 
under  Zarlino,  then  leading  singer  and  finally,  from  1603,  choirmaster. 
Growing  up  amid  the  accumulated  traditions  of  the  century,  his  numerous 


20 


THE  SIXTEENTH  CENTURY 


works  of  every  description  (from  1585)  have  much  breadth  and  variety. 
Notable  are  his  humorous  part-songs  or  mascherate  (1590). 

Several  other  names  might  be  added,  such  as  Giovanni  Ferretti  of  Ancona 
(canzone,  1567-91),  Vincenzo  BelfHaver  (d.  1588  ?),  and  Giovanni  Bassano, 
long  a choir-trainer  at  St.  Mark’s  (works,  1585-1602). 

57.  Other  North  Italian  Masters.  — The  Venetian  school 
reaches  far  outside  of  Venice  itself.  With  the  whole  of  north- 
ern Italy  Venice,  as  the  metropolis,  was  in  the  closest  commercial 
and  social  relations,  so  that  the  whole  valley  of  the  Po  consti- 
tuted a region  musically  united. 

In  the  1 6th  century  the  Venetian  Republic  stretched  along  the  north 
bank  of  the  Po  almost  150  miles,  including  cities  like  Padua,  Vicenza, 
Verona,  Mantua,  Brescia,  Cremona  and  Bergamo,  while  on  its  borders 
were  Ferrara,  Bologna,  Modena,  Parma  and  Milan. 

Throughout  this  whole  region  the  drift  of  composition  by  the 
best  masters  was  strongly  toward  forms  like  the  madrigal,  the 
canzona  and  the  like,  in  which  fresh,  varied  and  piquant  senti- 
ment might  find  expression.  In  sacred  music  the  motet  was 
much  more  cultivated  than  the  mass,  apparently  because  its 
treatment  was  not  so  conventional  and  its  topics  were  more 
diversified.  In  the  search  for  splendor  and  charm  of  effect  there 
was  a tendency  to  increase  the  number  of  voices  and  to  introduce 
more  and  more  license  in  their  handling — all  looking  toward 
the  later  emancipation  of  harmony  from  the  tyranny  of  the  modes 
and  of  strict  contrapuntal  rules. 

Connected  with  Padua  is  the  name  of  Costanzo  Porta  (d.  1601),  who  was 
born  at  Cremona  about  1530  and  studied  with  Wiilaert.  He  was  a Minorite 
who  was  constantly  in  request  as  choirmaster.  His  longest  terms  of  service 
were  at  Osimo  from  1552,  at  Ravenna  from  1567,  and  at  Loreto  from  1578, 
but  he  was  twice  at  Padua,  from  1565  and  1595,  where  he  died.  His  works 
(from  1555)  range  from  sacred  to  secular  in  a style  of  dignity  and  beauty. 
Among  his  pupils  was  Lodovico  Balbi  (d.  1604),  also  a Minorite,  a singer  at 
St.  Mark’s  and  at  Verona,  and  choirmaster  at  Padua  in  1585-91  (works  from 
1570).  A later  writer  of  some  power  was  Giulio  Belli  (d.  1613?),  who  was 
choirmaster  from  1582  at  many  different  places,  including  Padua  from  1607 
(works  from  1584). 

At  Vicenza  we  note  Giovanni  Matteo  Asola  (d.  1609),  choirmaster  from 
1581,  with  many  able  sacred  works  (from  1570),  and  Leone  Leoni,  from  1588 
cathedral-choirmaster,  whose  many  works,  sacred  and  secular  (1588-1622), 
were  much  used. 

At  Mantua  was  Jachet  de  Mantua  [Jacques  Colebaud]  (d.  before  1559),  a 
Frenchman  who  appeared  about  1527  as  a singer  and  later  became  both  ca- 


THE  VENETIAN  SCHOOL 


21 


thedral  and  ducal  choirmaster,  producing  only  sacred  works  (1539-67)  in  a 
conservative  style.  [He  is  seriously  confused  with  Jachet  de  Berchem,  as 
well  as  both  of  them  with  De  Buus.]  Jacob  van  Wert  (d.  1596),  also  a for- 
eigner, born  in  1536,  was  a choirboy  at  Mantua  and  from  1566  choirmaster 
for  30  years,  except  for  a short  term  at  Novellara  from  1568.  Though  he 
seems  to  have  had  strenuous  difficulties  with  his  co-workers,  he  was  highly 
honored.  He  was  a prolific  madrigalist  (n  vols.  1558-95),  but  left  also 
many  motets.  Giovanni  Giacomo  Gastoldi  (d.  1622)  was  in  the  ducal  service 
from  1582,  producing  a large  number  of  works,  sacred  and  secular  (from  1581), 
including  some  balletti  (5-6-part  dances)  that  became  widely  known.  Other 
Mantuan  musicians  were  Benedetto  Pallavicino,  Van  Wert’s  successor  in  1596 
(11  vols.  of  madrigals,  1579-1612),  Girolamo  Belli  (12  vols.  1583-1617),  and 
Alessandro  Striggio  (d.  1587),  born  about  1535,  a famous  violist,  from  1560  at 
Florence  and  from  1574  at  Mantua.  His  works  (from  1560  and  finally  pub- 
lished posthumously  by  his  son)  include  several  intermezzi  in  madrigal  style 
(1565-85),  which  were  connected  with  the  Florentine  innovations  (see  sec. 
70). 

At  Brescia  we  note  Costanzo  Antegnati,  born  in  1557,  who,  like  his  father, 
was  a celebrated  organ-builder,  also  in  1584-1619  cathedral-organist,  with 
masses  and  madrigals  (1571-92)  and  a book  on  the  organ  (1608),  with  pieces 
of  his  own. 

At  Cremona  the  chief  name  is  Marc’  Antonio  Ingegneri  (d.  1592),  born  at 
Verona  about  1545,  a pupil  of  Ruflfo  at  Verona,  and  from  1576  choirmaster 
at  Cremona,  with  many  noble  works  (1573-87).  The  excellence  of  his  style 
appears  from  the  fact  that  his  Resftonsoria  (1588)  were  long  ascribed  to 
Palestrina.  Monteverdi  was  his  pupil. 

At  Bergamo  mention  should  be  made  of  the  Sicilian  Pietro  Vinci  (d.  1584), 
cathedral-choirmaster  from  1571  (10  vols.  of  madrigals,  besides  other  works, 
from  1563). 

At  Ferrara,  south  of  the  Po,  music  began  to  flourish  early  in  the  Middle 
Ages  under  the  patronage  of  the  powerful  dukes  of  the  Este  family.  In  the 
13th  century  their  court  was  the  headquarters  of  the  Italian  troubadours,  and 
later  a centre  for  painting  as  well  — an  artistic  eminence  that  lasted  till  the 
1 8th  century.  Many  of  the  later  Netherlanders  worked  here,  like  Des  Pres 
and  Isaac  before  1500  and  Brumel  from  1505,  besides  Johannes  Gallus  [Jean 
le  Cocq],  who  died  before  1543  as  ducal  choirmaster,  and  Jachet  de  Berchem, 
from  1555  ducal  organist  (works,  chiefly  secular,  1546-61).  Other  choir- 
masters were  Francesco  Viola,  at  Modena  from  1530  and  at  Ferrara  from 
about  1558,  who  edited  some  of  Willaert’s  works  (1559),  besides  issuing 
madrigals  of  his  own  (from  1550)  ; Alfonso  della  Viola,  notable  for  his  inci- 
dental music  for  several  plays  (from  1541),  of  which  only  the  words  remain; 
and  Paolo  Isnardi,  with  many  masses,  lamentations,  psalms,  etc.,  besides 
madrigals  (1561-98). 

At  Modena  the  outstanding  name  is  Orazio  Vecchi  (d.  1605),  where,  after 
holding  church  offices  at  Correggio,  he  became  choirmaster  in  1596.  From 
1580  he  put  forth  a long  series  of  beautiful  madrigals  and  canzonetti,  depicting 
varying  moods,  grave  and  gay,  and  in  1594  a notable  madrigal-comedy, 
Amfipar7iasso . Almost  equally  fine  were  his  sacred  works. 


22 


THE  SIXTEENTH  CENTURY 


At  Milan,  among  the  later  Netherlanders,  Weerbecke  was  a teacher  from 
1472,  Simon  de  Quercu  in  the  cathedral  choir  before  1508  and  Matthias 
Hermann  choirmaster  in  1538-55.  Among  the  madrigal- writers  were  Vin- 
cenzo Ruffo,  born  at  Verona  and  choirmaster  there  from  1554  and  at  Milan 
from  1563,  except  six  years  at  Pistoia,  whose  works  (1542-88)  were  highly 
esteemed,  and  the  organist  Giuseppe  Caimo  (works,  1564-85).  More  impor- 
tant was  Orfeo  Vecchi  (d.  before  1604),  choirmaster  at  Sta.  Maria  della  Scala, 
prolific  as  a church  writer  (from  1 590) . 

58.  The  Papal  Chapel.  — While  northern  Italy  was  thus  culti- 
vating composition,  especially  in  secular  directions,  with  enthusi- 
asm and  brilliance,  important  progress  was  taking  place  at  Rome, 
but  usually  with  a different  spirit  and  emphasis.  In  Rome  ad- 
vance was  practically  confined  to  establishments  identified  with 
the  papal  court  — the  Papal  or  Sistine  Chapel,  St.  Peter’s,  St. 
John  Lateran,  Sta.  Maria  Maggiore,  and  one  or  two  others  of 
the  basilicas.  While  secular  writing  was  not  neglected,  the  ac- 
cent fell  upon  ecclesiastical  music  and  upon  such  a conservative 
handling  of  it  as  befitted  the  churches  that  stood  as  models  for 
the  Catholic  world.  Furthermore,  the  drift  of  Roman  taste  and 
manners  was  at  the  time  less  toward  sensuous  display  and  less 
vivacious  and  impressionable  than  in  cosmopolitan  and  luxurious 
Venice. 

The  15  th  century  closed  with  a decided  decline  in  the  prestige  of 
the  Papacy,  owing  to  the  evil  lives  and  violent  intrigues  of  certain 
pontiffs,  but  the  16th  opened  with  a reassertion  of  dignity  and  power  by 
Julius  II.  (1503-13)  and  Leo  X.  (1513-22),  the  latter  of  whom  was 
called  upon  to  meet  the  beginnings  of  Protestantism.  After  these  the 
longer  pontificates  were  those  of  Clement  VII.  (1523-34),  Paul  III. 
(1534-50),  Gregory  XIII.  (1572-85)  and  Clement  VIII.  (1592-1605). 
During  the  16th  century  it  is  notable  that  none  of  the  popes  was  chosen 
from  Venice  or  its  dependencies. 

The  Papal  Chapel  is  an  institution  with  a long  and  peculiar 
history,  reaching  back  to  the  singers’  schools  of  the  early  popes. 
During  the  Middle  Ages  its  traditions  developed  until  it  became 
a fixed  feature  of  the  papal  court.  Election  to  it  was  a great 
honor,  being  for  life  and  including  a moderate  salary,  with  many 
curious  perquisites.  The  rule  was  that  none  but  priests  or  those 
who  might  be  priests  were  eligible.  Elderly  members  were  usu- 
ally removed  by  promotion  to  more  lucrative  church  positions. 

The  number  of  singers  varied — 9 about  1450,  12-16  a little  later,  20 
about  1510,  36  about  1520,  24  through  most  of  the  century,  then  18-32 
for  a time.  As  the  need  grew  for  competent  sopranos  and  altos,  much 


THE  PAPAL  CHAPEL 


123 


skill  was  used  in  the  culture  of  the  higher  tones  of  the  male  voice  (a 
specialty  remarkably  developed  in  Spain).  After  1600  even  castrates  or 
evirati  were  admitted  to  some  extent. 

The  leadership  of  the  Chapel  was  ordinarily  intrusted  to  the  oldest 
singer,  but  special  choirmasters  were  sometimes  designated.  At  first 
sight  it  would  seem  curious  that  during  the  16th  century  so  few  of  the 
choirmasters  known  by  name  were  eminent  composers,  but  it  appears 
that  the  choirmaster  of  St.  Peter’s  usually  had  oversight  of  the  choir  in 
the  Sistine  Chapel  as  well. 

Naturally  here  sacred  polyphony  was  developed  to  its  highest 
perfection.  It  is  customary  to  single  out  the  great  Palestrina  as 
the  chief  agent  in  this,  but  it  should  be  remembered  that  he  was 
one  of  a series  of  masters,  some  of  whom  preceded  him,  and 
that  the  quick  recognition  of  his  power  implies  a considerable 
preparation.  It  was  inevitable  that  the  best  works  of  current 
styles  should  be  desired  by  the  papal  authorities,  and  that  able 
composers  should  be  eager  to  compete  for  approval. 

Among  masters  already  named,  two  were  members  of  the  Papal  Chapel  — 
Dufay  in  1428-37  and  Des  Pres  in  1486-94?.  Probably  others  were  active 
there  also.  Certainly  the  initial  impetus  for  the  Roman  school  came  direct 
from  the  Netherlands.  From  about  1515,  composers  of  Italian  birth  began  to 
be  prominent. 

Eleazar  Genet  [Carpentras]  (d.  1532?)  was  born  near  Avignon,  joined  the 
Papal  Choir  in  1508,  ultimately  becoming  choirmaster,  and  in  1521  returned  to 
Avignon  as  a papal  agent.  His  masses,  lamentations  and  hymns,  in  a style 
antique  and  austere,  were  printed  by  Channay  at  Avignon  in  types  cut  by 
Briard  (from  1532). 

Costanzo  Festa  (d.  1545),  a Roman  born,  on  the  other  hand,  was  a writer 
of  original  power.  From  1517  he  sang  in  the  Papal  Chapel,  for  which  his 
sacred  works  (printed  posthumously)  were  written,  including  the  Te  Deum 
still  used  at  the  election  of  a pope  and  other  great  occasions.  His  style,  with 
its  sweet  and  earnest  fidelity  to  the  text,  foreshadows  Palestrina,  whence 
Ambros  calls  him  the  “ morning-star  ” of  the  new  epoch.  He  issued  one  book 
of  madrigals  (1537). 

Ghiselin  Danckerts,  a Zeelander,  was  in  the  Chapel  in  1538-65,  then  re- 
tiring on  a pension.  Besides  composing  skillfully  (few  works  extant),  he 
took  the  conservative  side  in  the  debate  between  Vicentino  and  Lusitano  in 
1551  (see  sec.  72). 

Jacob  Arcadelt  (d.  c.  1560),  born  in  the  Netherlands  about  1514,  was  in  the 
Chapel  in  1540-9,  went  to  Paris  probably  about  1555,  and  died  there  as  royal 
musician  (see  sec.  65).  He  is  best  known  by  his  five  books  of  exquisite 
madrigals  (1539-44),  which  rank  among  the  best.  His  sacred  works  came 
later. 

Cristobal  Morales  (d.  1553),  born  at  Seville  in  1512,  after  serving  in  the 
Chapel  in  1535-40,  was  probably  choirmaster  at  Toledo  and  Malaga.  He 


124 


THE  SIXTEENTH  CENTURY 


stands  out,  not  only  as  the  ablest  of  the  Spaniards  who  now  begin  to  appear 
at  Rome,  but  as  one  of  the  greatest  of  Palestrina’s  immediate  predecessors, 
and  his  works  are  still  somewhat  in  use.  His  style  was  serious,  but  eminently 
tasteful  and  free  from  secularities  (masses  and  magnificats  from  1542). 

Giovanni  Animuccia  (d.  1570?),  born  at  Florence,  was  choirmaster  at  St. 
Peter’s  in  1555-71,  filling  the  interval  between  the  terms  of  Palestrina.  He  is 
notable  as  the  first  to  write  laudi  spirituali  (1563-70)  for  Neri  (see  sec.  76), 
besides  madrigals  (from  1547)  and  masses  (from  15 67).  His  brother,  Paolo 
Animuccia  (d.  1563),  was  choirmaster  at  the  Lateran  in  1550-2. 

59.  Palestrina.  — The  finest  tendencies  of  the  time  were 
summed  up  in  the  achievements  of  Palestrina,  whose  half-cen- 
tury of  activity  was  almost  wholly  spent  at  Rome.  Even  in  his 
own  lifetime  his  genius  was  seen  to  be  of  the  highest  order,  at 
once  representative  and  original,  with  an  exaltation  that  re- 
mained unmatched  for  more  than  a century.  Yet,  wonderful  as 
it  was,  its  permanent  impress  upon  musical  art  has  been  limited, 
because  chiefly  put  forth  in  a form  of  church  music  which  in 
theory  holds  itself  aloof  from  other  music  and  which  was  not  an 
ultimate  type.  Both  the  greatness  and  the  limitation  of  Pale- 
strina’s work  are  evidenced  by  the  fact  that  it  had  comparatively 
little  sequel.  In  its  own  field  it  was  a consummation  that  could 
not  be  surpassed,  but  it  came  at  a time  when  musical  progress 
was  turning  with  avidity  to  other  fields. 

The  Palestrina  style  commands  admiration,  not  for  its  mere 
technical  dexterity  as  polyphony,  though  it  is  full  of  extreme 
skill,  nor  for  its  stupendous  or  startling  effects,  though  it  is  emi- 
nently sublime,  but  for  its  rejection  of  intellectual  cleverness 
for  its  own  sake,  its  instinctive  avoidance  of  secular  elements 
and  a secular  spirit,  its  success  in  finding  ways  of  expression 
perfectly  germane  both  to  the  solemn  texts  treated  and  to  the 
conditions  of  the  Roman  liturgy,  and  an  indescribable  ideality 
or  etherealness  of  conception.  This  ideality  makes  it  to  the 
modern  taste  somewhat  cold  and  impersonal.  Yet,  when  prop- 
erly rendered  and  properly  considered,  its  representative  works 
stand  among  the  noblest  triumphs  of  religious  art.  While  the 
Venetian  styles  were  facing  forward  toward  the  more  passionate 
forms  of  the  17th  and  later  centuries,  the  Palestrina  style  be- 
longed rather  to  the  mediaeval  world,  with  its  emphasis  upon 
monastic  reveries  and  contemplation,  so  that  it  can  be  fully  ap- 
preciated only  through  sympathy  with  that  unmodern  realm  of 
belief  and  sentiment, 


PALESTRINA 


125 


Giovanni  Pierluigi  da  Palestrina  (d.  1594)  acquired  his  name  from  the 
village  where  he  was  born  (in  1526)  and  had  his  early  training.  At  14  he 
probably  went  to  Rome  for  four  years,  studied  with  a Netherlander,  Gaudio  Mell 
(not  Goudimel),  and  in  1544  returned 
to  Palestrina  as  organist,  marrying 
there  in  1547.  In  1551  he  was  called 
to  St.  Peter’s  as  choirmaster,  whence 
in  1555  for  about  six  months  he  was 
taken  into  the  Papal  Chapel,  being 
thrown  out,  with  others,  by  a change  of 
popes  and  an  enforcement  of  the  rule 
against  married  singers.  He  then  be- 
came choirmaster  successively  at  the 
Lateran  and  in  1561  at  Sta.  Maria  Mag- 
giore,  besides  being  employed  by  the 
Pope  from  1565  to  supply  various  works 
for  his  Chapel.  In  1571  he  was  called 
back  to  St.  Peter’s,  where,  in  spite  of 
attractions  elsewhere  (as  to  Mantua  in 
1583),  he  remained  till  his  death,  over 
twenty  years  later.  In  1581,  having 
lost  his  wife,  he  was  married  again  to 
a wealthy  widow.  Though  probably  of  humble  origin  and  perhaps  early 
struggling  with  hardship  and  the  jealousy  of  rivals,  his  later  years  were  spent 
in  ease  and  honor.  It  is  said,  however,  that  of  his  four  sons,  the  three  more 
promising  died  young.  His  renown  was  both  attested  and  enhanced  by  his 
connection  with  the  debate  before  the  Council  of  Trent  (see  below)  and  by 
his  position  as  composer  to  the  Papal  Choir  — a dignity  conferred  only  upon 
him  and  upon  his  successor  Anerio. 

His  works  were  probably  more  numerous  than  of  any  other  Italian  writer  of 
the  period,  including  over  90  masses  (12  books,  1554-1601),  over  500  motets 
(7  books,  1563-84),  and  other  church  pieces,  such  as  hymns,  lamentations, 
litanies,  offertoria,  laudi  and  madrigali  spirituali,  etc.,  and  over  100  madrigals 
(from  1555).  They  are  now  republished  complete  in  a standard  edition  of 
33  vols.  (1862-1903).  His  Improperia  have  been  sung  in  the  Sistine  Chapel 
on  Good  Fridays  since  1560,  and  many  other  works  are  still  in  use. 

In  the  middle  of  the  century  there  arose  a sharp  debate  about 
the  whole  method  of  ecclesiastical  music.  As  has  been  noted 
(sec.  44),  the  Netherlanders  evolved  their  praxis  out  of  secular 
music,  not  hesitating  to  take  ‘ subjects  ’ for  masses  and  motets 
from  popular  song,  even  those  with  vulgar  or  jocose  words. 
They  even  tolerated  the  singing  of  these  phrases  to  their  origi- 
nal words,  while  the  counterpoint  proceeded  with  the  Latin 
text.  When  these  customs  were  transplanted  to  Rome,  they 
were  bound  sooner  or  later  to  be  challenged.  When,  therefore, 


126 


THE  SIXTEENTH  CENTURY 


at  the  end  of  the  memorable  Council  of  Trent  the  general  sub- 
ject of  music  in  public  worship  came  up,  a strong  presentation 
was  made  against  all  figured  music  and  in  favor  of  Plain-Song 
only.  After  hearing  from  a committee  chosen  to  indicate 
abuses,  the  Council  simply  voted  against  the  use  of  whatever 
was  “lascivious  or  impure,”  and  the  matter  was  left  to  the  pro- 
vincial synods  with  a general  warning. 

The  definition  of  what  was  u lascivious  or  impure”  remained  an  open  ques- 
tion. The  drastic  action  originally  proposed  was  powerfully  combatted  by 
the  influence  of  various  members,  among  them  the  Emperor  Ferdinand  I.,  who 
sent  a formal  notice  that  in  his  judgment  figured  music  should  not  be  excluded, 
“since  it  often  arouses  the  feeling  of  piety.” 

In  1564  Pius  IV.,  himself  a music-lover,  brought  the  subject  before  the 
cardinals,  and  a small  committee  was  named  to  consider  it.  They  speedily 
agreed  to  the  exclusion  of  all  words  except  those  of  the  prescribed  Latin 
texts,  with  all  careless  alterations  of  the  latter,  and  to  the  importance  of  so 
restricting  the  expansion  of  musical  phrases  upon  single  syllables  and  the 
confusion  of  conflicting  voice-parts  as  to  leave  the  words  and  sense  of  the 
text  obvious  to  the  hearer.  Many  works  conforming  to  these  principles  were 
already  in  use,  but,  to  make  the  matter  sure,  a recent  work  of  Palestrina’s  was 
named  by  the  Pope  as  a model.  This  is  the  one  now  known  as  the  Mass  of 
Pofe  Marcellus  (from  the  Pope  who,  in  1555,  had  made  a special  effort  to 
purify  church  music).  Hence  came  in  later  times  an  exaggerated  estimate  of 
Palestrina  as  “ the  saviour  of  church  music,”  with  many  perversions  of  the 
story.  From  this  time  there  was  a marked  improvement  in  the  character  of 
the  works  regularly  used  in  the  Papal  Chapel,  but  it  was  one  that  really  began 
before  1564  and  to  which  many  composers  contributed.  In  Palestrina’s  own 
style  there  was  a distinct  advance  from  about  1560.  In  1576  Gregory  XII. 
intrusted  the  revision  of  the  Gradual  and  Antiphonary  to  Palestrina,  but  most 
of  the  actual  work  was  done  by  his  pupil  Giovanni  Guidetti  (d.  1592). 

60.  Other  Roman  Masters.  — The  composers  who  wrought  at 
Rome  after  about  1570  were  necessarily  influenced  by  the  new 
ideals  that  had  been  set  up,  and  this  period  is  justly  considered 
as  the  best  of  the  Roman  school.  Within  certain  natural  limits 
the  forms  in  which  Palestrina  and  his  immediate  successors 
worked  and  the  methods  they  used  were  thought  to  be  the  acme 
of  musical  art.  This  special  type  continued  into  the  17th  and 
1 8th  centuries,  and  is  still  supported  by  the  official  approval  of 
the  Catholic  Church.  But,  as  will  be  seen,  progress  in  absolutely 
new  directions  became  so  absorbing  that  the  Palestrina  style  was 
presently  overtopped  in  popular  interest  and  historic  importance 
by  styles  belonging  to  a totally  different  sphere. 


THE  ROMAN  SCHOOL 


127 


In  the  long  list  of  Palestrina’s  contemporaries  and  followers  these  are  most 
worthy  of  special  mention  : — 

Giovanni  Maria  Nanino  (d.  1607),  born  at  Tivoli  about  1545,  after  study 
probably  with  Gaudio  Mell,  Palestrina’s  reputed  teacher,  became  a singer  at 
Sta.  Maria  Maggiore  in  1571  and  choirmaster  at  S.  Luigi  dei  Francesi  in 
1575  and  at  Sta.  Maria  Maggiore  from  1579.  He  founded  an  important  sing- 
ing-school in  which  Palestrina  was  a teacher,  with  a noble  line  of  pupils.  He 
was  in  the  Papal  Chapel  in  1577-9,  and  its  choirmaster  from  1604.  He  is 
ranked  as  a composer  of  high  order,  belonging  to  the  conservative  school  like 
Palestrina,  though  not  equaling  him  in  originality  or  productiveness.  His 
relatively  few  remaining  works  (from  about  1571)  are  largely  secular,  but 
include  some  masses,  motets  and  lamentations.  With  him  was  associated 
his  nephew,  Giovanni  Bernardino  Nanino  (d.  1623),  a less  striking,  but  more 
enterprising,  genius  (works  from  1588). 

Tomas  Luis  de  Victoria  [called  Vittoria  in  Italy]  (d.  c.  1613)  was  born  at 
Avila  (Spain)  about  1540,  came  to  Rome,  studied  under  Morales,  in  1566 
became  singer  and  later  choirmaster  at  the  German  College  and  later  at  S. 
Apollinare,  and  from  1589  served  in  the  Royal  Chapel  at  Madrid.  He  was  a 
close  friend  of  Palestrina  and  their  styles  were  similar,  though  he  had  a warmth 
peculiarly  his  own.  His  extant  works  are  all  sacred  and  are  numerous  and 
powerful  (from  1576).  He  often  wrote  for  many  voices. 

Felice  Anerio  (d.  1614),  born  at  Rome,  a pupil  of  G.  M.  Nanino,  was  so 
closely  affiliated  with  Palestrina  that  their  works  have  been  confounded. 
After  holding  lesser  positions,  in  1594  he  succeeded  him  as  composer  to  the 
Papal  Choir  — the  only  other  appointee  to  this  post.  His  known  works  are 
not  many  (1585-1606). 

Giovanni  Francesco  Anerio  (d.  c.  1620),  perhaps  the  brother  ot  Felice,  was 
born  about  1567,  and  in  1575-9  was  a choirboy  at  St.  Peter’s  under  Pale- 
strina. In  1609  he  was  royal  choirmaster  in  Poland  and  in  1610  at  Verona, 
but  returned  to  Rome  in  1611.  His  fertility  was  great  and  his  works  (from 
1599)  were  extremely  varied,  the  later  ones  being  quite  out  of  the  recognized 
a cappdla  styles.  He  arranged  Palestrina’s  Marcellus  Mass  and  two  others 
for  four  voices  (1619). 

Francesco  Soriano  (d.  1620),  born  at  Rome  in  1549  and  a pupil  of  Zoilo, 
G..  M.  Nanino  and  Palestrina,  held  several  posts  as  choirmaster  — from  1581 
at  S.  Luigi  dei  Francesi,  soon  after  at  Mantua,  from  1587  at  Sta.  Maria  Mag- 
giore and  again  from  1600,  in  1599  at  the  Lateran,  and  from  1603  at  St. 
Peter’s.  His  motets,  masses,  psalms,  passions  and  madrigals  (from  1581) 
show  a versatile  and  powerful  genius ; he  also  rearranged  the  Marcellus  Mass. 

Tiburtio  Massaini  is  an  example  of  representatives  of  the  Roman  school 
whose  activity  was  mainly  elsewhere.  He  was  in  Rome  in  1571,  at  various 
places  in  Italy  afterward,  and  also  in  imperial  service  in  Austria  (many  works 
from  1569). 

Lesser  names  are  Annibale  Zoilo,  choirmaster  at  the  Lateran  in  1561-70  and 
then  in  the  Papal  Chapel  (works  from  1563)  ; Annibale  Stabile  (d.  c.  1595), 
a pupil  of  Palestrina,  choirmaster  in  Rome  from  1575  (works  from  1572)  ; and 
Giovanni  Andrea  Dragoni  (d.  1598),  also  one  of  Palestrina’s  pupils,  choir- 
master at  the  Lateran  in  1576-94  (works  from  1575). 


CHAPTER  VIII 


CHURCH  MUSIC  IN  NORTHERN  AND  WESTERN  EUROPE 

61.  In  General.  — The  story  of  music  in  northern  Europe  at 
this  time  gathers  about  three  centres,  Austria,  the  seat  of  the 
Hapsburg  line  of  emperors,  Bavaria,  more  or  less  associated 
with  it,  and  Saxony,  the  headquarters  of  the  Protestant  Refor- 
mation. The  first  two  were  intimately  affiliated  with  Italy  and 
shared  in  all  Italian  tendencies,  while  the  last  tended  to  strike 
out  into  new  paths  in  sacred  music.  It  is  convenient  and  valid 
to  consider  them  somewhat  apart.  Chronologically  it  would 
be  better  to  begin  with  Austria,  but  topically  it  is  more  useful 
to  turn  at  once  to  the  rise  of  Reformation  music  in  Saxony. 
This  will  lead  on,  finally,  to  a survey  of  musical  progress  in 
P'rance,  the  Low  Countries  and  England,  all  of  which  were 
affected  by  the  Reformation. 

62.  The  Lutheran  Reformation.  — Lutheran  Protestantism  be- 
gan in  Saxony  and  took  its  name  from  Martin  Luther,  a highly 
educated  Augustinian  monk,  well  versed  in  music,  who  at 
Wittenberg,  in  1517,  publicly  protested  against  the  sale  of  indul- 
gences and  other  abuses  in  the  papal  system  as  then  administered, 
and  who  by  1520  had  become  so  outspoken  as  to  be  excommuni- 
cated. His  action  was  a symptom  of  a widespread  feeling  that 
was  waiting  for  organization.  Luther  at  once  attracted  able 
coadjutors,  and  under  their  leadership  a complex  revolution  of 
thought  swept  over  northern  Germany,  winning  support  from 
all  classes. 

The  issue  between  the  Protestant  and  the  Catholic  parties  was  fully 
defined  by  1520  (the  Diet  of  Augsburg),  but  was  not  held  to  be  irrec- 
oncilable till  about  1550.  The  progress  of  the  movement  during  its 
first  century,  owing  to  the  extreme  partition  of  Germany  into  many 
petty  states,  all  overshadowed  by  the  Empire,  was  involved  in  compli- 
cated political  entanglements,  by  which  its  character  was  often  distorted, 
its  well-wishers  split  into  hostile  factions,  and  its  advance  checked.  In 
consequence,  its  features  escape  succinct  statement. 

128 


THE  LUTHERAN  CHORALES 


129 


From  his  doctrines  of  salvation  by  faith,  the  right  of  private 
judgment,  and  the  universal  priesthood  of  believers,  Luther 
deduced  radical  conclusions  regarding  public  worship,  including 
special  emphasis  on  congregational  participation  in  the  service 
in  the  vernacular  language  (instead  of  Latin).  Although  hold- 
ing closely  to  the  outlines  of  the  Roman  service,  he  undertook 
to  reduce  some  features  that  he  held  objectionable  and  to  make 
the  people’s  part  conspicuous.  He  seized  upon  common  song 
as  indispensable,  and  in  1523  and  1526,  with  the  aid  of  Walther 
and  others,  issued  orders  of  service  with  this  element  empha- 
sized. The  hymns  provided  were  as  a rule  specially  written  in 
metrical  form.  For  them  melodies  were  either  borrowed  from 
favorite  folk-songs  or  part-songs  or  were  newly  written  in 
similar  style,  thus  linking  the  new  style  with  forms  already  uni- 
versally popular.  These  melodies  were  later  called  ‘ chorales.’ 

Though  at  first  the  musical  treatment  of  chorales  was  more  or  less 
contrapuntal,  with  the  melody  in  the  tenor,  before  1600  the  style  ad- 
vanced to  a definitely  harmonic  form,  with  a solid  progression  of  chords, 
the  melody  in  the  treble  and  the  lines  sharply  defined  by  cadences  and 
controlled  by  a coherent  tonality. 

The  chorale  became  the  nucleus  of  Protestant  church  music 
generally,  and  it  is  of  historic  importance  because  its  wide  ac- 
ceptance hastened  and  popularized  the  new  tendency  to  base 
composition  on  harmony  rather  than  counterpoint,  and  because 
from  its  extensive  literature  German  organ  music  later  derived 
an  inexhaustible  fund  of  suggestion.  What  the  treasures  of 
Plain-Song  had  been  to  Catholic  music,  the  new  treasures  of  the 
chorale  style  became  to  Protestant  music.  This  innovation, 
then,  contained  the  germ  of  great  subsequent  developments. 

Luther’s  strong  interest  in  congregational  music  involved  no  hostility 
to  choir  music.  He  himself  knew  and  loved  a wide  range  of  mass  and 
motet  music,  and  he  advocated  the  free  use  of  whatever  was  excellent,  be- 
lieving that,  with  slight  exceptions,  there  was  no  distinction  between 
Catholic  and  Protestant  standards.  Thus  much  of  the  rich  polyphonic  ac- 
cumulation, so  far  as  accessible  in  northern  Germany,  passed  over  at  once 
into  Protestant  usage.  With  it  came  not  a little  Plain-Song. 

It  is  a curious  fact  that  presently  the  Catholic  world  lost  the  power 
of  further  advance  in  the  style  of  which  Palestrina  was  master,  while  in 
Protestant  Germany  contrapuntal  theory  and  practice  were  cultivated  to 
such  purpose  that  in  the  18th  century  a second  culmination  was  possible. 
It  is  idle  to  speculate  whether  this  transfer  of  artistic  vitality  was  due  to 
religious  or  racial  causes. 


130 


THE  SIXTEENTH  CENTURY 


On  the  whole,  the  Reformation  tended  to  awaken  a new 
energy  in  society,  whence  the  art  of  music  on  all  its  sides  received 
benefit.  But  the  political  confusions  and  distresses  that  ac- 
companied it  were  unfavorable  to  all  art,  and  these  were  not 
overpast  till  late  in  the  17th  century.  Yet,  even  from  the  first, 
the  liberation  of  thought  and  feeling  made  popular  expression 
in  song  and  with  instruments  more  spontaneous,  varied  and 
heartfelt.  Much  of  the  wealth  and  depth  of  modern  music 
may  surely  be  traced  in  large  measure  to  the  mental  and  spiri- 
tual stimulus  accompanying  the  rise  of  Protestantism. 

The  various  Saxon  states,  including  cities  like  Dresden  and  Leipsic  on  the 
east,  Erfurt  and  Miihlhausen  on  the  west,  and  Wittenberg  and  Magdeburg  on 
the  north,  may  be  regarded  as  a region  musically  distinct  at  this  time.  Here 
may  be  noted  the  following  individuals : — 

Martin  Luther  (d.  1546),  born  at  Eisleben  in  1483,  was  educated  at  Magde- 
burg, Eisenach  and  Erfurt,  entered  the  priesthood  in  1 507,  became  professor 
of  theology  at  Wittenberg  in  1508,  where  in  1517  his  95  theses  against  indul- 
gences were  put  forth.  In  1521  he  appeared  before  the  Diet  of  Worms,  where 
his  views  were  rejected  by  the  Emperor.  To  save  his  life,  the  friendly  Elec- 
tor of  Saxony  seized  him  and  kept  him  hidden  for  a year  at  the  Wartburg, 
where  he  completed  the  first  part  of  his  epochal  translation  of  the  Bible. 
In  1524  appeared  his  first  hymn-book,  later  augmented.  In  1525,  having 
renounced  the  priesthood,  he  married.  In  1529-30  occurred  his  controversy 
with  the  Swiss  Reformers,  and  the  important  Diet  of  Augsburg.  The  control 
of  the  movement  then  gradually  passed  into  the  hands  of  others.  His  original 
hymns  grew  from  4 in  1524  to  35  in  1545,  and  for  a few  of  these  he  perhaps 
wrote  melodies.  He  was  fond  of  music,  a good  flutist  and  lutist,  and  highly 
appreciative  of  good  polyphony,  but  was  not  a composer.  His  literary  refer- 
ences to  music  are  enthusiastic  and  discriminating. 

Johann  Walther  (d.  1570),  Luthers  chief  musical  adviser,  was  electoral 
choirmaster  at  Torgau  from  1525  and  at  Dresden  from  1548,  retiring  in  1554 
on  a pension.  The  musical  editor  of  the  first  hymn-book  (1524  and  later  edi- 
tions to  1551),  he  was  the  composer  or  arranger  of  many  chorales.  He  also 
wrote  motets  and  sacred  part-songs  (from  1538). 

To  meet  the  demand  for  German  church  music,  a multitude  of 
writers  now  began  to  appear  throughout  northern  Germany, 
some  of  whom  displayed  skill  in  so  combining  contrapuntal  learn- 
ing with  popular  types  that  their  choir  music  had  a certain  kin- 
ship with  the  new  congregational  music.  The  texts  used  were 
often  the  same  as  those  of  the  Roman  liturgy,  though  generally 
in  a German  version.  It  is  interesting  to  observe  occasional 
settings  of  the  story  of  the  Passion  — the  germ  of  a form  later 
of  great  importance. 


EARLY  LUTHERAN  COMPOSERS 


131 


The  following  names  may  be  taken  as  illustrations  : — 

Sixt  Dietrich  (d.  1548),  born  at  Augsburg,  spent  his  early  life  in  Switzer- 
land, not  developing  his  decided  musical  talent  till  about  50  years  old,  when 
he  came  to  Wittenberg  (motets,  hymns,  etc.,  from  1535). 

Matthaeus  Le  Maistre  (d.  1577),  a Netherlander,  was  court-choirmaster  at 
Dresden  in  1554-67.  His  works  (from  1563)  include  masses,  motets  and 
many  part-songs.  As  early  as  1566  he  arranged  chorales  with  the  melody  in 
the  treble.  [Not  to  be  confused,  as  by  Fetis  and  Kade,  with  Hermann  Matthias 
of  Milan.] 

Antonio  Scandello  (d.  1580),  born  at  Brescia  about  1517,  came  to  Dresden 
before  1553  as  court -trumpeter  and  assisted  Le  Maistre  from  1566,  succeeding 
him  in  1568.  He  was  a notable  writer  of  sacred  and  secular  part-songs  (from 
1551),  also  of  masses,  motets  and  several  Passions  (from  1550). 

Elias  Nikolaus  Ammerbach  (d.  1597),  organist  of  the  Thomaskirche  in 
Leipsic  from  1 560,  was  a composer  for  organ  and  clavichord,  and  author  of 
a handbook  (1571)  on  organ  tablature,  with  important  data  about  tuning, 
fingering,  etc. 

Leonhardt  Schroter  (d.  c.  1600),  from  about  1572  cantor  at  Magdeburg,  left  a 
cluster  of  sacred  part-songs,  etc.,  (from  1562),  that  mark  him  as  one  of  the 
able  Protestant  contrapuntists. 

Joachim  a Burck  [Moller]  (d.  1610)  also  made  a name  as  a prolific  com- 
poser, being  organist  at  Miihlhausen  from  1566.  His  works,  nearly  all  sacred, 
included  three  Passions  (from  1568),  a Communion  Service,  psalms,  many 
Odce  sacra  or  part-songs. 

To  this  general  region  also  belong  Jobst  vom  Brant,  governor  of  Liebenstein 
from  1549  ; Nikolaus  Rosth,  court-musician  at  Heidelberg,  Altenburgand  Wei- 
mar (works  from  1583,  including  a Passion,  1598);  Henning  Dedekind  (d. 
1628),  cantor  and  pastor  at  Langensalza  (works  from  1588);  and  Valentin 
Haussmann,  a busy  organist  at  Gerbstedt,  whose  talent  lay  rather  in  developing 
the  resources  of  secular  music,  especially  dances  (works  from  1 588).  The  first 
known  members  of  the  great  Bach  family  also  belong  here  — Hans  Bach 
of  Wechmar  (near  Gotha)  and  his  son  Veit  Bach  (d.  1619)  being  direct 
ancestors  of  J.  S.  Bach,  besides  others  whose  relationship  is  not  clear. 

Outside  of  the  Saxon  circle  were  — 

Franz  Elers  (d.  1590),  who  spent  his  life  at  Hamburg  as  teacher,  from 
1529  cantor  and  finally  choirmaster  at  the  cathedral.  His  large  and  im- 
portant Gesangbuch  (1588)  contains  much  Protestant  ritual  music. 

Johann  Eccard  (d.  161 1),  born  at  Miihlhausen  in  1553,  a friend  of  a Burck, 
was  first  in  the  service  of  Baron  Fugger  of  Augsburg,  from  1579  choirmaster  at 
Konigsberg  (Prussia),  and  from  1608  in  the  Electoral  Chapel  at  Berlin.  His 
many  part-songs  (from  1574),  mostly  sacred,  show  him  to  have  been  one  of 
the  more  original  writers  of  the  time. 

Bartholomaus  Gesius  (d.  1613),  born  about  1555,  first  studied  theology, 
but  from  1595  was  cantor  at  Frankfurt-an-der-Oder.  His  important  works 
(from  1569)  include  a Passion  (1588),  a great  number  of  sacred  part-songs, 
motets,  psalms,  several  masses,  festival  anthems  and  a popular  handbook 
(1609). 


132 


THE  SIXTEENTH  CENTURY 


Hieronymus  Pratorius  (d.  1629),  born  at  Hamburg  in  1560,  studied  there 
and  at  Cologne,  was  cantor  at  Erfurt  in  1580-2,  and  then  returned  to  Ham- 
burg to  succeed  his  father  as  organist  at  the  Jacobikirche.  His  masterly 
style  resembles  that  of  the  best  Venetian  contrapuntists,  passing  to  the  use 
of  as  many  as  20  voices  (works  from  1599).  The  earlier  Christoph  Pra- 
torius (d.  1609)  was  cantor  at  Liineburg  in  1562-82  (works  from  1560). 

63.  The  Imperial  Chapel.  — The  musical  importance  of  Aus- 
tria at  this  time  arose  from  its  relation  to  the  Holy  Roman 
Empire,  which  was  the  inheritor  of  the  prestige  and  romantic  in- 
terest of  the  ancient  imperial  idea,  combined  with  the  mediaeval 
idea  of  Catholic  unity.  From  1438  the  Emperors  were  all 
of  the  Hapsburg  line,  and  the  imperial  capital  was  usually 
Prague  or  Vienna.  The  dignity  of  the  court  required  the 
maintenance  of  a musical  establishment  or  Chapel,  which 
naturally  came  to  have  international  significance.  The  close 
relations  of  the  Empire  with  the  Papacy  brought  their  musi- 
cal activities  into  the  same  class.  During  the  16th  century 
most  of  the  leading  imperial  musicians  were  Netherlanders. 
Yet  with  these  were  others  who  illustrated  the  native  genius 
once  shown  by  the  Minnesinger  and  again  to  become  famous 
in  the  18th  century.  While  most  of  these  composers  devoted 
themselves  to  the  current  Catholic  types  of  composition,  many 
of  them  were  so  successful  in  simpler  part-writing  of  the  German 
type  that  their  works  were  often  adopted  into  Protestant  use. 

The  list  of  emperors  for  the  period  includes  Maximilian  I.  (1493-1519), 
Charles  V.  (1519-56),  Ferdinand  I.  (1556-64,  also  sole  ruler  of  Austria 
from  1522),  Maximilian  II.  (1564-76),  and  Rudolf  II.  (1576-1612). 

Among  the  musicians  in  the  imperial  service  were  the  following : — 

Heinrich  Isaac  (d.  c.  1517),  who  was  born  in  Flanders  before  1450,  but 
won  his  first  fame  in  Italy,  especially  as  organist  and  choirmaster  at  Florence 
in  1477-89.  From  1497  he  was  court-musician  to  Maximilian  I.  at  Inns- 
bruck. From  him  we  have  many  important  masses,  motets  and  part-songs 
(from  1506),  the  former  in  the  older  Netherland  style,  the  latter  akin  to  the 
early  Protestant  music.  Among  his  pupils  was  Senfl. 

Paul  Hofheimer  (d.  1537)  was  born  near  Salzburg  in  1459.  From  about 
1480  he  was  imperial  organist  and  composer,  first  at  Innsbruck,  from  1496 
at  Vienna.  About  1515  he  was  made  a noble  and  received  other  honors, 
being  held  as  the  foremost  German  musician  of  his  time.  He  returned  to 
Salzburg  after  1520,  perhaps  by  way  of  Augsburg.  As  a player  he  was 
unrivaled,  but  of  his  compositions  little  remains. 

Jakob  Clemens  (d.  1558?)  was  a Netherlander  who  is  usually  supposed 
to  have  been  imperial  choirmaster  under  Charles  V.,  but  of  his  career  nothing 


THE  IMPERIAL  CHAPEL 


133 


is  certain.  This  is  the  more  remarkable  because  he  was  one  of  the  finest 
contrapuntists  after  Des  Pres,  artistic,  rich  in  melody  and  harmony,  versatile 
and  highly  productive.  His  known  works  (from  1543,  most  apparently  post- 
humous) are  numerous,  including  a series  of  noble  masses,  over  150  motets, 
many  chansons  on  French  or  Flemish  popular  songs,  etc.  [He  was  called 
Clemens  non  Papa  to  distinguish  him  from  Clement  VII.  (pope,  1523-34),  who 
was  himself  a good  musician.] 

Arnold  von  Bruck  (d.  1545),  born  at  Bruges,  was  choirmaster  to  Ferdi- 
nand I.  from  1534  — to-day  known  through  some  60  scattered  motets  and  part- 
songs  with  Latin  or  German  words  (from  1538). 

Philippe  de  Monte  (d.  1603),  born  at  Mechlin  in  1521,  after  serving  in  the 
Chapel  Royal  of  England,  became  imperial  choirmaster  in  1563,  at  first  assist- 
ing Vaet.  His  long  term  of  service  and  his  extant  works  (from  1554)  indi- 
cate something  of  his  eminence  as  one  of  the  ablest  Netherlanders.  His 
publications  (from  1554)  included  over  35  volumes  of  madrigals  and  chan- 
sons for  3-7  voices,  10  volumes  of  motets  for  4-12  voices,  3 volumes  of 
madrigali  spirituali,  1 of  masses,  with  many  more  in  MS. 

Jakob  Vaet  (d.  1567),  another  Netherlander,  was  in  the  Royal  Chapel 
from  1562  and  choirmaster  from  1564.  He  is  supposed  to  have  served  as 
an  early  promoter  of  the  strict  style  (many  motets,  some  masses  and 
magnificats,  a fine  Te  Deum  for  8 voices,  from  1562). 

Alexander  Utendal  (d.  1581),  of  Netherland  origin,  spent  his  life  in 
Innsbruck  as  choirboy,  singer  and  assistant  choirmaster  under  the  Arch- 
duke Ferdinand.  He  wrote  psalms,  motets,  masses,  German  and  French 
part-songs  (from  1570). 

Alard  du  Gaucquier,  born  at  Lille,  was  in  the  Chapel  in  1564-76  and  later 
ducal  choirmaster.  His  reputation  rests  on  several  masses  and  magnificats 
(from  1574). 

Jakob  Regnart  (d.  c.  1600),  still  another  Netherlander,  one  of  five 
brothers,  born  in  1540,  was  choirboy,  then  court-singer  and  assistant 
choirmaster  at  Prague,  about  1582  under  the  Archduke  Ferdinand  at  Inns- 
bruck, returning  in  1595  to  Prague  again.  His  varied  works  (from  1574) 
were  much  esteemed,  especially  his  canzone  and  German  part-songs. 

Jakob  Handl  [usually  called  Gallus]  (d.  1591),  born  about  1550  in  Carniola 
(southwest  Austria),  in  1578,  after  some  travel,  became  choirmaster  at  Olmiitz, 
whence  in  1585  he  went  to  Prague.  He  stands  out  as  one  of  the  best  Ger- 
man contrapuntists  during  the  Palestrina  epoch,  belonging,  however,  rather 
to  the  Venetian  school.  His  masses,  motets  and  moralia  or  4-part  songs 
(from  1580)  were  long  in  high  repute  in  Germany. 

A few  lesser  names  are  Leonhardt  Paminger  (d.  1597),  rector  of  a school 
at  Passau  and  a good  motettist  (cycle  for  the  year,  posthumous)  ; Valentin 
Bacfart  [Graew]  (d.  1576),  a Hungarian  lutist,  from  1566  alternately  at 
the  courts  of  Vienna  and  Poland,  author  of  two  works  in  tablature,  with 
many  pieces  (1564-8);  Blasius  Ammon  (d.  1590),  a Tyrolese  singer  at 
Innsbruck  and  Vienna  (sacred  works  from  1582);  and  Francois  Sale 
(d.  1599),  about  1589  choirmaster  at  Hall  (Tyrol),  and  from  1593  singer 
at  Prague  (works,  mostly  sacred,  from  1589). 


34 


THE  SIXTEENTH  CENTURY 


64.  Lassus  and  the  South  German  Masters.  — In  the  16th 

century  Bavaria  was  almost  as  potent  a factor  in  the  Empire 
as  Austria.  Religiously  it  was  strongly  Catholic  in  sympathy 
and  in  close  communication  with  Italy.  Some  of  its  cities,  like 
Nuremberg,  Augsburg  and  Ulm,  were  musically  known  through- 
out Europe,  not  only  as  Meistersinger  centres,  but  as  head- 
quarters of  music-printing  and  instrument-making.  About  1550 
Munich  rose  to  eminence  under  the  culture-loving  Dukes 
Albrecht  and  Wilhelm.  Furthermore,  here  as  elsewhere,  the 
native  power  of  German  genius  was  beginning  to  compete  on 
equal  terms  with  that  of  the  Netherlands.  Even  Protestant 
Wiirttemberg  and  other  states  to  the  west,  though  less  active, 
were  not  without  worthy  musicians. 

In  the  early  development  of  South  German  music  are  seen  certain 
musical  traits  that  are  more  or  less  distinctive  of  all  German  music. 
Perhaps  most  valuable  among  these  is  a remarkable  sincerity  and  direct- 
ness of  sentiment,  heartfelt  and  wholesome,  combined  with  imaginative 
and  creative  energy.  From  the  outset  German  composers  realized  the 
unequaled  capacity  of  music  for  the  real  embodiment  of  human  life  on  all 
its  sides,  and  strove  to  fuse  together  in  their  works  the  intellectuality  of 
the  Netherland  school  with  their  own  richness  of  experience  and  phan- 
tasy. In  illustration,  it  is  enough  to  adduce  the  German  fondness  for  the 
song-type,  from  the  homely  folk-song  with  its  artless  earnestness  up  to 
the  studied  part-song.  The  religious  bent  of  the  German  mind,  also,  is  ex- 
ceptional in  its  heartiness  of  conviction,  its  independence  and  its  practical- 
ity. Hence,  wrhile  the  mere  working  out  of  forms  suited  to  the  mediaeval 
ritual  was  elsewhere  accomplished,  the  broader  application  of  music  to 
religious  utterance  was  first  conceived  in  the  atmosphere  of  German  life. 
Even  in  the  16th  century,  when  music  w?as  acquiring  its  first  self-con- 
sciousness as  an  art,  the  later  German  leadership  in  it  can  already  be 
descried,  asserting  itself  in  both  vocal  and  instrumental  wanting. 

Historically,  it  was  important  that  so  gifted  an  artist  as 
Orlandus  Lassus  was  brought  to  spend  the  productive  part 
of  his  career  in  Germany.  His  genius  towered  above  that  of 
all  his  contemporaries  except  Palestrina.  Both  were  in  full 
command  of  the  resources  of  polyphonic  construction,  and  both 
aspired  to  compositions  of  the  grandest  magnitude  and  quality. 
But  the  differences  between  them  are  noteworthy.  Lassus  ex- 
hibited the  greater  breadth  and  fertility,  though  he  was  not 
as  essentially  ideal  in  purely  ritual  music.  His  warmth  of 
human  feeling  and  readiness  of  sympathy  made  his  impress 
upon  progress  wider  and  more  genial.  He  was  more  truly  a 


LASSUS  AND  HIS  CONTEMPORARIES 


135 


man  of  the  time,  and  the  fact  that  he  lived  at  a princely  court, 
with  its  free  and  shifting  society,  in  the  heart  of  the  music-loving 
German  highlands,  gave  him  great  influence.  But  the  musical 
strength  of  South  Germany  was  not  dependent  upon  him  alone. 
Other  geniuses  appeared  to  give  at  this  point  an  impetus  that 
did  not  cease  for  centuries. 

The  line  of  distinguished  Bavarian  masters  includes  — 

Ludwig  Send  (d.  1556),  born  about  1492  at  Zurich,  a pupil  of  Isaac  at 
Innsbruck  and  his  successor  there  for  a short  time.  In  1519  he  was  in  the 
Imperial  Chapel  at  Vienna  and  from  1520  in  Augsburg,  and  from  1526  court- 
choirmaster  at  Munich,  remaining  till  his  death.  His  works  (from  1526)  were 
masses,  motets,  hymns,  German  part-songs,  etc.,  in  a style  that  united  the  old 
strictness  with  something  of  Venetian  richness.  Although  a Catholic,  he  was 
a friend  of  Luther,  and  the  latter  greatly  admired  his  music. 

Ludwig  Daser  (d.  1589),  born  at  Munich  in  1520,  was  from  1552  court- 
choirmaster  there  till  displaced  by  Lassus  in  1560,  then  from  1571  court-choir- 
master at  Stuttgart.  Though  a worthy  composer,  his  works,  mostly  masses, 
remain  in  MS.,  except  a Passion  (1578). 

Orlandus  de  Lassus  [Orlando  di  Lasso]  (d.  1594)  was  born  at  Mons 
(Hainaut)  in  1532.  His  boy’s  voice  gave  him  a dangerous  notoriety,  so  that 
about  1544  he  was  abducted  and  taken  to  Palermo  and  Milan  in  the  service  of 
Ferdinand  Gonzaga.  About  1550  he  passed  into  another  noble’s  service  at 
Naples  and  Rome.  He  is  said  to  have  visited  England,  but  settled  at  Antwerp. 
Called  thence  in  1556  to  Munich,  he  became  court-choirmaster  in  1560,  and 
continued  in  office  and  in  great  honor  till  about  1590,  when  he  broke  down 
mentally  through  overwork.  His  life  and  Palestrina’s  were  almost  exactly 
contemporaneous,  but  it  is  not  known  that  they  ever  met.  Lassus  had  the 
great  advantage  of  travel  and  of  constant  contact  with  culture  amid  unbroken 
appreciation.  Though  his  office  was  laborious  and  difficult,  requiring  great 
executive  ability,  his  patron  spared  nothing  to  keep  the  Chapel  one  of  the  best 
in  Europe.  The  duke  being  a stanch  Catholic,  most  of  Lassus’  sacred  works 
were  of  the  mass  or  motet  class,  but  freedom  of  treatment  was  encouraged. 
His  most  celebrated  work  was  the  Penitejitial  Psalms  (1584).  Secular  works 
of  every  description  were  also  welcomed,  including  not  only  stately  madrigals, 
but  also  sprightly  canzonets,  drinking-songs  — even  musical  jokes.  The  list 
of  his  compositions  (from  1552)  is  enormous  — almost  2500  separate  works, 
now  published  in  a standard  edition.  He  had  many  pupils,  of  whom  Eccard 
and  Reiner  were  perhaps  the  foremost. 

Of  Lassus’  co-laborers,  mention  may  be  made  of  Ivo  de  Vento  (d.  1575),  a 
Spaniard,  organist  from  1569  (motets  and  good  German  part-songs  from  1569). 

Not  far  west  of  Munich  is  the  much  older  Augsburg,  the  capital  of  Swabia, 
prominent  in  the  16th  century  as  a centre  for  music-publishing.  Here  a 
notable  patronage  came  from  the  wealthy  Barons  Fugger.  Among  earlier 
composers  were  Sigismund  Salbinger,  an  ex-monk,  who  edited  valuable  col- 
lections of  part-songs  (1540-9)  ; Jacob  van  Kerle  (d.  c.  1583),  a Nether- 


36 


THE  SIXTEENTH  CENTURY 


lander,  first  in  service  at  Cambrai,  then  in  Italy,  from  1562  under  the  Cardinal 
of  Augsburg  (sacred  works  from  1558);  and  the  able  Eccard  (d.  1611), 
already  mentioned  (sec.  62). 

Adam  Gumpeltzhaimer  (d.  1625),  born  in  1559,  was  musically  trained  in  an 
Augsburg  monastery,  was  then  a general  teacher,  and  from  1581  cantor  at  one 
of  the  churches,  being  also  employed  by  the  Duke  of  Wiirttemberg.  Besides 
a theoretical  work  (1591),  he  produced  a quantity  of  motets,  psalms  and  part- 
songs  (from  1591)  that  show  him  to  have  been  a careful  student  of  both  old 
and  new  styles. 

Hans  Leo  Hassler  (d.  1612),  born  in  1564  at  Nuremberg,  was  one  of  the 
earliest  Germans  to  seek  instruction  in  Italy,  where  he  studied  with  A.  Ga- 
brieli at  Venice.  In  1 585  he  became  organist  to  Baron  Fugger  at  Augsburg  and 
later  also  at  the  cathedral,  whence,  in  1601,  he  was  called  to  Nuremberg 
and  in  1608  to  the  Royal  Chapel  at  Dresden.  His  diversified  works,  sacred 
and  secular  (from  1590),  not  only  show  Venetian  influence,  as  in  the  use  of 
double  choirs,  but  indicate  the  German  genius  for  harmony,  with  important 
efforts  to  utilize  artistically  the  folk-music  of  various  peoples.  His  was  a singu- 
larly enterprising  and  influential  genius,  sometimes  ranked  with  that  of  Pale- 
strina and  Lassus.  His  two  brothers,  Jakob  Hassler  (d.  c.  1611),  a famous 
organ-virtuoso  at  Hechingen  and  Prague,  and  Kaspar  Hassler  (d.  1618), 
organist  at  Nuremberg  (sacred  collections  from  1598),  are  also  to  be  named. 

Gregor  Aichinger  (d.  1628)  was  long  organist  to  Baron  Fugger  (from  1584) 
and  later  vicar-choral  at  the  cathedral.  His  motets  and  part-songs  (from 
1590)  are  praised  for  their  elegance  and  simplicity. 

Christian  Erbacli  (d.  1635),  born  in  1573,  was  also  organist  to  Baron  Fug- 
ger and  succeeded  Hassler  at  the  cathedral  in  1602.  He  was  a motettist  of 
importance  (works,  1600-11),  and  another  leader  in  the  direction  of  harmonic 
treatment. 

North  of  the  Danube  in  Franconia  is  the  interesting  city  of  Nuremberg. 
Among  the  many  instrument-makers  here  were  Konrad  Gerle  (d.  1521),  whose 
lutes  were  famous  before  1470,  Hans  Gerle  (d.  1570),  his  son,  known  for  good 
lutes  and  violins  from  1523  and  for  important  works  in  tablature  (1532-52), 
and  Hans  Neusidler  (d.  1563),  also  the  compiler  of  lute-books  (1536-44). 
Georg  Forster  (d.  1568),  a physician  here  from  about  1544,  was  one  of  the 
earliest  and  best  collectors  of  folk-songs  (5  parts,  1539-56)  and  of  motets  ; and 
Friedrich  Lindner  (d.  1597),  cantor  of  the  Egidienkirche,  was  another  useful 
editor  of  masses,  motets  and  madrigals,  adding  examples  of  his  own  (1585-91). 

At  Ansbach  we  note  Kaspar  Othmayr  (d.  1553),  canon  in  the  church  of  St. 
Gumbertfrom  1547,  a worthy  composer  of  part-songs  (1546-9),  and  Jakob  Mei- 
land  (d.  1577),  court-choirmaster,  afterwards  at  Frankfort  and  Celle,  a strong 
contrapuntist  (works  from  1564). 

Passing  now  westward  into  Wiirttemberg,  Hohenzollern  and  Baden,  we  add 
the  names  of  Arnold  Schlick,  the  blind  court-organist  at  Heidelberg,  whose 
books  on  organs  and  organ  music  (1511-2)  are  curious  and  valuable,  indicat- 
ing a genius  ahead  of  his  time  ; Bernhard  Schmid  (d.  1592),  famous  as  one  of 
the  founders  of  the  German  organ  style  (with  Sweelinck  and  Scheidt), 
organist  at  Strassburg,  first  at  St.  Thomas  and  from  1564  at  the  cathedral 
(organ-book,  1577),  in  both  of  which  posts  he  was  succeeded  by  his  son 


THE  FRENCH  ROYAL  CHAPEL 


137 


Bernhard  Schmid  (organ-book,  1607)  ; Wolf  Heckel,  aStrassburg  lutist  (book, 
1556)  ; Sebastian  Ochsenkuhn  (d.  1574),  court-lutist  at  Heidelberg  and  author 
of  a valuable  lute-book  (1558);  Leonhard  Lechner  (d.  1604),  first  a choirboy 
under  Lassus  at  Munich,  teacher  at  Nuremberg  from  1570,  and  from  1584 
court-choirmaster  at  Hechingen  and  from  1587  at  Stuttgart  — a versatile  and 
gifted  composer  (works  from  1575)  ; Melchior  Schramm,  another  good  con- 
trapuntist, long  in  the  court  chapel  at  Sigmaringen,  afterwards  organist  at 
OlTenburg  (works  from  1576)  ; Jakob  Reiner  (d.  1606),  one  of  the  best  pupils 
of  Lassus,  music-master  all  his  life  (though  not  a priest)  in  the  monastery  of 
Weingarten,  with  a varied  list  of  works  (from  1579)  ; Jakob  Paix  (d.  c.  1590), 
organist  at  Lauingen,  whose  collections  of  organ-pieces  and  motets  (from  1583), 
with  some  original  masses  and  a history  of  sacred  music  (1589),  are  impor- 
tant ; and  Lucas  Osiander  (d.  1604),  the  son  of  the  distinguished  Nuremberg 
theologian,  himself  early  noted  as  a Protestant  leader  in  Wurttemberg  and 
finally  abbot  at  Adelsberg,  with  an  important  Choralbuch  (1586)  having  the 
melodies  in  the  treble  (as  by  Le  Maistre  in  1566  and  by  David  Wolkenstein 
in  1583). 

65.  France  and  Spain.  — The  16th  century  was  a stormy 
period  in  French  history,  made  so  at  first  by  the  craving  of 
successive  kings  to  widen  their  boundaries  in  the  face  of  strong 
rivals,  and  later  by  the  bitter  contests  between  Catholics  and 
Huguenots.  What  notable  musical  life  there  was  appeared  in 
the  Royal  Chapel  at  Paris,  to  the  advancement  of  which  the 
ambitious  Francis  I.  devoted  special  attention.  The  styles 
there  most  cultivated  were  those  of  the  Netherland  masters, 
with  gradually  more  and  more  chansons  and  lute  music. 
Originality  in  composition  was  almost  wholly  confined  to 
writers  born  in  the  Netherlands. 

The  chief  kings  (House  of  Valois)  were  Louis  XII.  (1498-1515), 
Francis  I.  (1515-47),  who  was  the  rival  of  Charles  V.,  Henry  II.  (1547- 
59),  Charles  IX.  (1560-74)  and  Henry  III.  (1574-89).  The  latters 
successor,  Henry  IV.  (1589-1610),  the  first  of  the  Bourbons,  was  of 
Huguenot  sympathies. 

The  information  about  most  of  the  musicians  in  the  Royal  Chapel  is 
scanty,  but  the  following  should  be  named  : — 

Jean  Mouton  (d.  1522),  born  near  Metz,  studied  with  Des  Pres,  early 
entered  the  service  of  Louis  XII.,  continuing  under  Francis  I.,  and  became 
canon  of  St.  Quentin,  where  he  died.  His  many  works  exhibit  not  only  the 
utmost  polyphonic  facility,  but  an  expressiveness  singularly  like  his  master's. 
They  include  some  masses,  many  motets  and  chansons  (from  1505).  He  was 
Willaert’s  teacher,  and  thus  a link  with  the  Venetian  school. 

Antoine  de  Riche  [Divitis],  a singer  first  at  Bruges,  then  in  the  Burgundian 
Chapel,  before  1515  in  the  Royal  Chapel  at  Paris,  is  favorably  known  by  a few 
works  (from  1514).  Claude  de  Sermisy  (d.  1562)  is  still  more  famous  as 


38 


THE  SIXTEENTH  CENTURY 


from  1508  singer,  then  about  1532-60  choirmaster  in  the  Chapel,  and  a strong 
writer  (works  from  1529).  Pierre  Colin,  singer  in  the  Chapel  in  1532-6,  was 
later  choirmaster  at  Autun  (masses  and  motets  from  1541).  Pierre  Certon 
(d.  1572),  a pupil  of  Des  Pres,  had  the  name  of  being  one  of  the  best  writers 
of  the  day  (works  from  1540). 

Clement  Janequin,  also  a pupil  of  Des  Pres,  is  entirely  unknown  except 
from  his  many  striking  chansons,  over  200  in  number  (1529-59),  many  of 
which  bear  descriptive  or  pictorial  titles  like  ‘ La  bataille,1  ‘ La  chasse  au 
cerf,’  1 Le  caquet  des  femmes,1  ‘ L’alouette,1  etc.,  introducing  a new  element 
of  depiction  into  composition. 

Jacob  Arcadelt  (d.  c.  1560),  who  has  already  been  noted  at  Rome  (sec.  58), 
much  more  celebrated  than  the  foregoing,  spent  the  last  years  of  his  life  at 
Paris  as  royal  musician,  leaving  some  motets  and  masses  (1545-57). 

Francois  Eustache  du  Caurroy  (d.  1609),  born  near  Beauvais  in  1549,  was 
in  the  Chapel  from  about  1568  for  40  years,  perhaps  as  choirmaster  through- 
out. His  extant  works  (from  1569)  are  few  and  not  equal  to  his  reputation  ; 
they  include  a Requiem  which  for  a century  was  the  only  one  used  for  the 
kings  of  France. 

Claudin  Lejeune  (d.  c.  1600)  was  court-composer  toward  the  end  of  the 
century.  It  has  been  thought  that  he  resigned  on  account  of  his  Huguenot 
opinions,  but  this  is  uncertain.  His  works  (from  1564)  are  mostly  chansons 
and  madrigals,  except  his  settings  of  metrical  Psalms,  which  are  important  in 
early  Calvinistic  music, 

Lesser  names  are  Jean  Courtois,  choirmaster  at  Cambrai  in  1539  (works 
from  1529),  Pierre  Cadeac  of  Auch  (works  from  1556),  and  Guillaume  Belin 
(d.  1568),  singer  in  the  Chapel  about  1547  (chansons  from  1539). 

Among  the  renowned  lutists  of  the  century  who  published  music  for  their 
instrument  were  Orance  Fin6  (d.  1555),  with  two  books  (1529-30);  Alberto 
da  Rippa  (d.  c.  1550),  court-lutist  from  1537  or  earlier,  with  pieces  from  1536 
and  two  books  (1553,  ’62,  each  6 parts)  ; Guillaume  Morlaye,  with  three  books 
(1552-8)  ; Adrien  Le  Roy  (d.  1599),  the  publisher,  with  several  books  of  his 
own,  an  instruction-book  and  very  many  valuable  collections  (from  1551); 
and  Jean  Antoine  de  Ba'if  (d.  1589),  a much-traveled  Venetian  who  about 
1566  gave  popular  concerts  at  Paris,  with  several  books  (1562-80). 

The  Swiss  Reformation,  beginning  before  1520  at  Zurich 
under  Zwingli,  won  the  adherence  of  the  Frenchman  Calvin 
before  1530  and  about  1535  came  under  the  latter’s  leader- 
ship at  Geneva,  which  was  thenceforth  the  fountainhead  of 
Protestantism  in  western  Europe.  Before  1550,  Calvinists  or 
Huguenots  became  numerous  in  France.  They  increased  in 
power  so  rapidly  that  from  1 562  for  thirty-five  years  civil  war 
between  them  and  the  dominant  Catholic  party  went  on,  in- 
cluding in  1572  the  notorious  Massacre  of  St.  Bartholomew, 
and  closing  in  1598  with  the  granting  of  toleration  by  the 
Edict  of  Nantes.  The  musical  influence  of  the  Huguenot 


THE  CALVINISTIC  CHORALES 


139 


movement  was  confined  to  the  encouragement  of  chorales,  often 
finely  harmonized.  These  were  adopted  into  Scottish  and 
English  use  to  some  extent  after  1558. 

Zwingli  was  a musical  amateur  and  not  averse  to  music  in  church 
worship,  but  his  party  went  far  beyond  him  in  antipathy  to  all  existing 
usages.  In  their  onslaughts  upon  churches  they  ruthlessly  destroyed 
organs  and  choir  collections.  Calvins  influence  was  cast  on  the  other 
side,  especially  in  favor  of  congregational  singing  of  the  Psalms.  Hence 
arose  a demand  for  metrical  versions  of  the  latter  and  for  practicable 
tunes. 

The  evolution  of  the  Calvinistic  hymns  and  tunes,  though 
analogous  to  that  of  the  Lutheran  chorales,  presents  peculiar 
features.  The  treasury  of  popular  song  from  which  they  drew 
their  inspiration  was  much  smaller,  their  total  number  was  less, 
and  they  were  disseminated  through  several  countries  of  varying 
traditions.  They  were  not  made  the  source  of  as  much  subse- 
quent treatment  by  organ-writers,  and  in  general  their  influence 
was  much  more  restricted.  Yet  in  themselves  they  were  often 
eminently  excellent. 

Clement  Marot  (d.  1544)  was  the  first  Calvinistic  psalmist.  He  was  in- 
troduced to  Huguenot  ideas  as  a boy  and  suffered  imprisonment  for  them 
about  1525.  Later,  however,  when  court-poet  to  Francis  I.,  he  prepared 
some  30  psalm-versions  in  ballad  style,  which  were  forthwith  taken  up  as  a 
novelty  by  the  gay  court  circle  and  sung  to  popular  airs.  But  they  were 
condemned  by  the  Sorbonne,  and  Marot  fled  to  Geneva,  where  he  added 
19  more  Psalms  (the  first  30  were  published  in  1541,  35  in  1542,  49,  with 
40  by  Beza,  in  1555).  It  is  supposed  that  Marot  arranged  some  of  the 
melodies  used.  His  version  was  gradually  completed  at  Calvin’s  desire  by 
Theodore  de  Beza  (d.  1605),  who  became  a Huguenot  in  1548.  The 
most  famous  of  those  who  fitted  music  to  these  versions  were  Bourgeois 
and  Goudimel,  but  others  experimented  with  the  new  and  popular  style. 

Loys  Bourgeois,  born  at  Paris,  became  a Huguenot  and  was  a singer  at 
Geneva  in  1545-57,  going  thence  to  Lyons  and  probably  later  to  Paris.  He 
issued  chorales  (1547, 1 5 54,  1561),  harmonized  for  4 voices,  himself  composing 
many  of  the  melodies.  Besides  thus  being  the  first  writer  of  Calvinistic 
music,  he  issued  a theoretical  work  (1550)  that  improved  solmization  and 
otherwise  simplified  the  hexachord-system.  (Cf.  IVaelrant,  sec.  66.) 

Claude  Goudimel  (d.  1572)  was  born  at  Besangon  about  1505.  [It  has  been 
commonly  said  that  he  was  a Netherlander,  a pupil  of  Des  Pres,  the  founder, 
about  1540,  of  a school  at  Rome  where  Palestrina,  G.  Animuccia,  G.  M.  Na- 
nino  and  other  composers  were  taught,  and  therefore  1 the  father  of  the  Roman 
school ; ’ but  it  is  now  thought  that  he  was  never  in  Rome,  and  was  confused 
with  Gaudio  Mell.]  From  at  least  1551  he  was  in  Paris,  for  a time  a partner 


140 


THE  SIXTEENTH  CENTURY 


of  the  publisher  Chemin,  in  1557  lived  at  Metz,  and  was  killed  in  the  St.  Bar- 
tholomew massacre  at  Lyons,  though  whether  actually  a Protestant  is  not 
clear.  His  masses,  motets  and  chansons  (from  1549)  are  written  in  a masterly 
style,  and  he  was  diligent  in  producing  motet  settings  of  metrical  Psalms  for 
4-5  voices  (1551-66),  the  melodies  of  which,  usually  in  the  tenor,  were  not 
original  with  him.  These  latter  were  important  additions  to  early  Calvinistic 
music,  though  too  elaborate  for  congregational  use. 

Philibert  Jambe  de  Fer  (d.  1572)  also  published  a complete  Psalter  (1561, 
possibly  in  part  as  early  as  1549).  He  also  was  killed  at  Lyons  with  Goudimel. 

It  is  natural  that  Spain,  with  its  intense  devotion  to  the  me- 
diaeval Church  and  under  princes  like  Charles  V.  (1515-56)  and 
Philip  11.(1556-98),  should  show  a strong  interest  in  church  mu- 
sic. But  the  notable  musicians  of  the  Royal  Chapel  were  Neth- 
erlanders,  the  most  famous  being  Gombert. 

In  both  Spain  and  Portugal,  also,  the  influence  of  the  Trou- 
badours lingered  long,  showing  itself  in  a special  taste  for  gay 
songs  and  dances  and  the  use  of  a great  variety  of  instruments. 
Not  much  of  this  is  preserved  in  detail,  but  we  know  that  the 
social  interest  in  poetry  and  song  was  considerable. 

Nicolas  Gombert,  born  at  Bruges,  was  perhaps  a pupil  of  Des  Pr&s. 
From  1530  he  taught  at  Brussels  and  in  1537  entered  the  Royal  Chapel 
at  Madrid,  first  as  trainer,  then  as  choirmaster,  though  apparently  with 
absences  at  Tournai.  His  works  (1539-57),  numbering  about  250,  range  over 
all  the  usual  forms,  sacred  and  secular,  in  a style  specially  clear,  solid  and  full 
of  feeling. 

Francisco  Guerrero  (d.  1599),  born  at  Seville  in  1527,  was  early  a singer 
there,  and  in  1555  competed  successfully  for  Morales’  post  as  cathedral-choir- 
master, remaining  45  years.  His  works  (from  1555)  are  all  sacred,  unless, 
possibly,  one  book  of  Spanish  part-songs  is  his. 

The  only  Portuguese  composer  to  be  named  is  Damiao  de  Goes  (d.  1560), 
born  in  1500,  trained  at  Padua,  who  lived  at  various  places  in  Europe  as  royal 
envoy  and  was  finally  employed  at  home  in  historical  writing.  He  had 
high  repute  as  a composer,  but  hardly  any  works  remain.  He  is  said  also 
to  have  written  a theoretical  treatise,  now  lost. 

Among  the  early  lute-books  (from  1546)  were  those  of  Enriquez  de 
Valderravano  (1547),  Miguel  de  Fuenllana  (1554)  and  Antonio  de  Cabezon 
(1578). 

66.  The  Netherlands.  — While  in  the  16th  century  the  leader- 
ship in  contrapuntal  music  passed  from  the  Low  Countries  to 
Italy  and  Germany,  yet  the  land  of  its  origin  not  only  provided 
teachers  for  all  the  rest  of  Europe,  but  preserved  her  own  in- 
terest as  well.  In  some  cases,  late  in  the  century,  the  study  of 
Italian  models  is  evident,  but  on  the  whole  the  Netherlands 


THE  LATER  NETHERLANDERS 


14 


continued  to  be  a fairly  independent  musical  region.  The  chief 
centre  of  activity  was  Antwerp.  The  commercial  instinct  of 
the  nation  showed  itself  in  decided  success  with  music-printing 
and  organ-building  throughout  the  century. 

From  the  accession  of  Philip  II.  of  Spain  in  1556  the  political  and 
social  condition  of  the  country  became  very  unfavorable  for  artistic 
advance,  since  for  almost  half  a century  the  energy  of  the  people  went 
into  struggles  for  freedom  from  Spanish  tyranny.  In  1579  the  Utrecht 
Union  of  seven  of  the  northern  provinces  was  the  beginning  of  the 
later  Republic,  but  this  led  the  Catholic  provinces  in  the  south  to  ally 
themselves  either  with  Parma  or  with  Spain  itself. 

After  the  death  of  Jacotin  in  1528  (see  sec.  47),  the  traditions  of  Antwerp 
Cathedral  were  sustained  by  a few  leaders,  such  as  : — 

Antoine  Barbe  (d.  1564),  who  was  master  of  the  choir-school  from  1527  and 
later  choirmaster.  His  extant  works  are  very  slight  (1540-51).  His  two 
sons  were  in  the  choir,  and  a daughter  married  Severin  Cornet  (d.  1582),  who, 
after  service  at  Mechlin,  was  from  1577  one  of  the  choir-trainers  at  Antwerp. 

Gerard  de  Turnhout  (d.  1580),  born  about  1520,  entered  the  choir  as  a 
singer  in  1545  and  succeeded  Barbe  in  1563,  but  in  1592  was  called  to  Madrid, 
where  he  died  (few  works,  from  1568).  During  his  service  at  Antwerp  the 
cathedral  was  plundered  by  a fanatic  mob,  the  organ  destroyed,  and  the  choir- 
library  scattered  or  burnt.  Turnhout  was  active  in  restoring  both.  His  son, 
Jean  de  Turnhout  (d.  after  1618),  was  choirmaster  to  the  Duke  of  Parma  at 
Brussels  from  about  1586. 

Benedict  Ducis  (d.  c.  1550?),  probably  born  about  1480  at  Bruges  and  a 
pupil  of  Des  Pres,  was  about  1510  head  of  the  Musicians’  Guild  at  Antwerp 
and  for  a time  organist  at  the  cathedral,  later,  perhaps,  migrating  to  England. 
His  many  motets  and  chansons  (from  1532)  are  unfortunately  much  confused 
with  those  of  Benedictus  Appenzeller,  choir-trainer  at  Brussels  in  1539-55. 

Thomas  Crecquillon  (d.  155 7)  from  1544  was  choirmaster  to  Charles  V., 
probably  at  Brussels,  besides  holding  church  offices  elsewhere.  He  is 
ranked  among  the  strong  composers  between  Des  Pres  and  Lassus  (many 
works,  from  1542). 

Hubert  Waelrant  (d.  1595),  born  about  1517,  entered  the  University  of 
Louvain  in  1529,  perhaps  studied  under  Willaert  at  Venice  and  in  1547 
established  a music-school  at  Antwerp,  engaging  also  in  music-publishing. 
He  advocated  solmization  with  the  syllables  bo,  ce,  di , ga , lo , ma,  ni  (known 
as  the  voces  belgce  or  1 bocedization  ’),  from  which  modern  usage  probably 
derived  its  do  and  si.  His  style  was  melodious  and  clear  (works  from  1554). 

Andre  Pevernage  (d.  1591),  born  at  Courtrai  in  1543,  where  he  was  first 
choirboy  and  then  choirmaster,  about  1577  became  choirmaster  at  Antwerp, 
where  his  decided  gifts  as  composer  were  displayed  (works  from  1574). 

Cornelis  Verdonck  (d.  1625),  born  in  1564,  was  a choirboy  in  the  Royal 
Chapel  at  Madrid  from  1572,  continuing  till  1598,  when  he  returned  to 
Antwerp  in  the  service  of  wealthy  patrons.  His  facility  gave  him  repute  for  a 
time  (works,  mostly  secular,  from  1584). 


142 


THE  SIXTEENTH  CENTURY 


Peter  Phillips  (d.  1624),  born  about  1560  in  England,  emigrating  because 
an  earnest  Catholic,  became  canon  at  Bethune,  visited  Rome  in  1595,  and  from 
1596  was  viceroyal  organist  at  Antwerp  or  Brussels.  His  madrigals  (from 
1591)  and  sacred  music  (from  1612)  show  him  to  have  been  a contrapuntist 
of  great  ability  in  the  Palestrina  style.  His  fame  as  the  first  writer  of  a true 
fugue  on  one  subject  (Burney)  is  now  disputed  in  favor  of  his  countryman 
Bull  (Davey).  After  1610  he  wrote  somewhat  in  the  new  monophonic  style 
and  with  a basso  continuo. 

Other  composers  were  Petit  Jan  Delatre,  from  1552  choirmaster  at  Liege 
(works  from  1539);  Christian  Hollander  (d.  before  1570),  choirmaster  at 
Oudenarde  in  1549-57  and  then  in  the  Imperial  Chapel  at  Vienna  (works 
posthumous)  ; Noe  Faignient  (works  from  1567)  ; and  Emanuel  Adriaensen,  a 
compiler  of  lute-books  (1584-92). 

Amsterdam  came  into  prominence  late  in  the  century  through  the  genius  of 
Jan  Sweelinck  (d.  1621),  born  in  1562,  the  son  of  the  organist  of  the  Old 
Church.  He  was  trained  at  Venice  by  Zarlino  and  G.  Gabrieli,  and  on  his 
return  in  1580  became  organist  at  the  Old  Church.  He  soon  became  famous 
as  one  of  the  great  players  and  teachers  of  the  age,  being  the  real  founder 
of  the  true  fugue,  with  its  development  from  a single  subject  through  the  use 
of  double  and  triple  counterpoint.  He  had  a sure  instinct  for  the  essential 
differences  between  vocal  styles  and  those  suited  to  the  organ,  and  by  ex- 
ample and  precept  served  as  the  pioneer  for  the  whole  North  German  school 
of  organists.  His  works,  vocal  and  instrumental,  were  but  partially  published 
during  his  life,  but  are  now  collected  in  a standard  edition  (1895-1903). 

67.  England.  — English  music  in  the  16th  century  stands  by 
itself,  and  has  not  always  been  justly  appreciated.  Its  isolation 
was  due  primarily  to  geographical  reasons,  but  also  to  England’s 
peculiar  relations  to  the  Papacy.  The  neglect  of  the  subject 
has  resulted  from  the  difficulty  of  getting  at  the  documents, 
which  are  now  better  known.  The  more  the  story  is  studied, 
the  more  interesting  and  even  astonishing  it  becomes. 

The  very  early  and  efficient  share  of  England  in  the  origin  of  counter- 
point has  already  been  noted  (sec.  45).  In  the  second  half  of  the  15th 
century  English  music  suffered  a check,  perhaps  because  of  the  unsettled 
conditions  during  the  Wars  of  the  Roses  (1455-85).  But  even  then  some 
interest  was  indicated  by  the  maintenance  of  the  Chapel  Royal  (flourish- 
ing from  at  least  1465),  by  the  conferring  of  musical  degrees  at  both 
Oxford  and  Cambridge  (from  1463),  by  the  number  of  monastic  and 
cathedral  choirs  and  organs,  by  the  chartering  of  a monopolistic  Minstrels’ 
Guild  (1469),  and  by  popular  interest  in  singing  of  all  kinds. 

The  Tudors  were  all  music-lovers,  and  during  the  reigns  from  Henry 
VII.  (1485-1509)  onward  the  Chapel  Royal  remained  the  chief  rallying- 
point  for  musicians,  a model  and  incentive  to  cathedral  and  private  es- 
tablishments, and  an  object  of  astonished  admiration  from  foreign  visitors. 
As  the  century  went  on,  English  players  were  more  and  more  drafted  into 


EARLY  ENGLISH  CHURCH  MUSIC 


143 


service  on  the  Continent,  even  when  the  existence  of  good  English 
compositions  was  but  slightly  known. 

Whether  or  not  at  the  opening  of  the  15th  century  true  coun- 
terpoint was  first  invented  by  Englishmen  and  by  them  handed 
over  to  the  industrious  Netherlanders  may  be  a question.  But 
in  the  16th  century  England  deserves  credit  for  much  progress 
peculiarly  her  own.  She  seems  to  have  led  the  way  in  writing 
for  keyboard  instruments.  Her  development  of  counterpoint 
early  in  the  century  was  distinct  from  that  of  the  later  Nether- 
landers or  their  disciples,  and  quite  as  remarkable.  In  the  re- 
modeling of  styles  under  the  influence  of  Protestantism  she 
made  an  original  combination  of  polyphony  with  the  new 
materials  of  Protestant  liturgies.  The  English  cultivation  of 
the  madrigal  and  its  relatives  was  also  strikingly  original. 

The  pre-Reformation  period  ended  under  Henry  VIII.  (1509-47)  with 
his  impulsive  break  with  Rome  about  1535  and  the  suppression  of  the 
monasteries  and  religious  houses  in  1536-40.  An  outbreak  of  icono- 
clastic zeal  against  the  old  order  followed,  which  wrought  havoc  in 
choir-libraries  and  organs  and  which  condemned  all  elaborate  service- 
music.  Then  came,  especially  under  Edward  VI.  (1547-53),  the  first 
steps  in  the  full  organization  of  the  Anglican  Church,  with  the  drafting 
of  new  liturgies  in  English.  Under  Mary  (1553-8)  the  old  usages  were 
somewhat  revived.  During  the  long  reign  of  Elizabeth  (1558-1603) 
sacred  music  again  became  notable  in  connection  with  the  new  Prayer 
Book,  leading  to  contrapuntal  achievements  of  remarkable  power.  The 
encouragement  then  given  brought  out  a long  line  of  talented  madrigal- 
ists  which  continued  into  the  troubled  time  of  the  first  Stuarts. 

The  number  of  early  composers  known  is  large,  among  whom  the  follow- 
ing may  be  mentioned  : — 

Henry  Abyngton  (d.  1497),  organist  at  Wells  in  1447,  Mus.  D.  at  Cam- 
bridge in  1463,  Master  of  the  Chapel  Royal  from  1465  ; Gilbert  Banastir, 
Master  of  the  Chapel  in  1482-1509;  Richard  Davy,  organist  at  Magdalen 
College,  Oxford,  in  1490,  who  is  said  to  have  written  the  earliest  Passion 
known;  Robert  Fayrfax  (d.  1529),  the  leading  genius  of  the  earliest  group, 
Mus.  D.  at  Cambridge  in  1501  and  at  Oxford  in  1511,  Master  of  the  Chapel 
from  1510,  later  organist  at  St.  Alban’s;  Nicholas  Ludford,  probably  in  the 
Chapel  about  1510-20;  and  John  Taverner,  organist  at  Boston  till  1530  and 
then  at  Oxford,  who  was  one  of  the  few  to  write  a mass  on  a secular  melody 
after  the  Netherland  style.  Hugh  Aston  (d.  1522),  probably  in  the  service 
of  the  Countess  of  Richmond,  later  Archdeacon  of  York,  is  known  by  instru- 
mental pieces  (before  1510)  that  are  the  first  of  the  kind  anywhere.  Henry 
VIII.  (d.  1547)  was  not  only  a patron  of  music,  but  played  on  several  instru- 
ments and  composed  masses,  motets  and  ballads  (probably  before  1530). 


1 44 


THE  SIXTEENTH  CENTURY 


Christopher  Tye  (d.  1572)  began  as  a choirboy  at  King’s  College,  Cam- 
bridge, in  1497,  was  organist  at  Ely  from  1541,  perhaps  also  in  the  Chapel 
Royal  for  a time,  and  became  a clergyman  in  1560.  Besides  his  curious  met- 
rical version  of  the  Book  of  Acts  with  varied  musical  settings  (1553),  he  left 
extensive  works  in  MS.,  including  masses,  Latin  and  English  motets,  a Pas- 
sion, etc.  (before  1560).  His  style  was  singularly  able  and  unartificial. 

John  Redford  (d.  before  1559),  organist  and  choirmaster  at  St.  Paul’s, 
London,  about  1535.  was  the  best  instrumental  writer  of  his  day,  leaving 
many  organ-pieces  of  historic  interest. 

Thomas  Tallis  (d.  1585),  born  about  1510,  organist  at  Waltham  Abbey 
till  1540  and  in  the  Chapel  Royal  till  1577,  obtained  a monopoly  of  music- 
publishing in  1575  (with  his  pupil  Byrd).  Besides  the  tunes,  canticles  and 
motets  published  during  his  life  (1560-75),  he  left  a mass,  many  more  motets 
(including  a gigantic  one  for  eight  5-voiced  choirs),  several  remarkable 
anthems  and  a few  madrigals.  He  is  sometimes  called  ‘the  father  of  Eng- 
lish cathedral  music,’  since  he  was  the  link  between  the  old  and  the  new 
schools  (see  sec.  68). 

68.  The  Prayer  Book  and  Music. — A reconstructed  liturgy 
was  one  of  the  earliest  undertakings  of  the  new  national  Church. 
Edward  VI.  authorized  two  successive  forms  (1 549,  1 552)  and 
Elizabeth  still  a third  (1559),  the  last  of  which  remained  in  use 
for  more  than  a century.  While  in  these  the  outlines  closely 
resembled  those  of  Roman  services,  yet  in  practice  Morning 
and  Evening  Prayer  (corresponding  not  to  the  Mass,  but  to 
Breviary  offices)  received  a special  accent,  with  a musical 
treatment  equal  to  that  of  the  Communion  itself.  In  conse- 
quence, Anglican  ritual  music  has  always  tended  to  be  quite 
distinct  in  its  texts  and  spirit. 

The  English  Reformation  was  a peculiarly  complicated  movement. 
Although  the  reactions  on  the  Continent  under  Luther  and  Zwingli  were 
immediately  known  in  England  and  approved  by  many,  the  secession  of 
Henry  VIII.  was  occasioned  by  his  personal  pique  at  the  Pope’s  attitude 
toward  his  marriages.  At  first  the  English  love  of  independence  was 
quite  as  influential  as  any  convictions  about  doctrine.  But  later,  when 
Mary  had  exasperated  the  nation  by  her  cruelties  and  when  the  refugees 
returned  from  Geneva  at  Elizabeth’s  accession,  the  Anglican  position 
became  decidedly  Calvinistic.  Thenceforward  two  parties  began  to  form 
— the  moderates,  who  would  keep  all  possible  continuity  with  the  ancient 
church,  and  the  radicals  (later  called  Puritans),  who  preferred  to  sweep 
away  all  traditions  and  begin  afresh.  The  latter  were  more  and  more 
inclined  to  oppose  ritual  music  because  of  its  associations  with  the 
Catholic  system. 

For  a time  it  was  demanded  that  whatever  music  was  used 
should  so  fit  the  syllables  with  solid  chords  that  every  word  of 


EARLY  ENGLISH  CHURCH  MUSIC 


45 


the  text  should  be  obvious  to  the  hearer  — a not  unnatural  re- 
action against  the  profuse  and  intricate  style  of  many  contra- 
puntal settings.  For  short  texts  it  was  entirely  applicable,  but 
for  the  longer  canticles  it  was  heavy  and  hampered  musical  ex- 
pression overmuch.  Before  the  end  of  the  century,  then,  this 
plain  harmonic  type  of  writing  was  again  supplemented  by 
ample  counterpoint. 

Among  the  famous  early  settings  of  parts  of  the  liturgy  were  the  Litany 
{Stone,  1544),  the  Canticles,  Creed,  Psalms  and  Communion  in  Plain- 
Song  {Merbecke,  1550),  and  the  Preces,  Versicles  and  Responses  ( Tallis , 
1552?).  The  composition  of  whole  Services  — settings  in  motet  style  of 
all  the  canticles,  etc.,  required  in  Morning  or  Evening  Prayer  or  in  the 
Communion  (analogous  to  the  Mass) — became  frequent  after  1560. 
With  these,  as  variable  parts,  came  the  writing  of  1 anthems,’  the  English 
counterpart  of  the  older  Latin  motets.  This  latter  form  has  had  a 
remarkable  modern  development. 

The  first  venture  in  hymn-tunes  was  the  Goostlie  Psalmes  of  Coverdale 
( 1 539),  derived  from  Lutheran  sources.  This  was  overshadowed  by  the 
metrical  Psalter  begun  by  Sternhold  in  1548  and  gradually  enlarged 
in  England  and  at  Geneva  until  1559,  when  three  very  different  vari- 
ants diverge  — the  Genevan,  much  influenced  by  Marot’s  French  version 
and  discontinued  after  1570,  the  English  (or  “ Old  Version’),  completed  in 
1562  and  supreme  in  the  Anglican  Church  till  about  1700  or  after,  and 
the  Scottish,  completed  in  1564  and  used  till  1650.  The  English  variant 
was  almost  wholly  in  ‘ common  metre  ’ and  at  the  best  had  but  about 
40  tunes  of  a plain  type,  while  the  Scottish  used  many  metres  and  had 
over  140  tunes  in  a much  richer  style.  The  readiness  of  Knox  and  his 
circle  to  utilize  the  best  Calvinistic  music  is  curiously  in  contrast  with  the 
English  reluctance. 

Although  the  Elizabethan  composers  pass  over  without  break  into  those 
of  the  early  17th  century  (see  secs.  69,  99),  the  earlier  leaders  should  be 
given  here : — 

John  Sheppard,  first  a choirboy  at  St.  Paul’s,  London,  in  1542  became 
organist  at  Magdalen  College,  Oxford,  and  from  1551  was  in  the  Chapel 
Royal.  He  left  services,  motets  and  anthems  (from  1550). 

John  Merbecke  (d.  1585?),  born  in  1523,  was  a choirboy  at  St.  George’s, 
Windsor,  and  later  organist  there.  In  1550  he  issued  his  famous  Plain-Song  set- 
tings of  the  Prayer  Book  services,  besides  leaving  a mass  and  a few  anthems. 
In  1544  he  was  almost  martyred  for  his  Protestant  views,  and  in  later  life  he 
was  more  theologian  than  musician. 

Richard  Edwards  (d.  1566),  also  born  in  1523,  was  both  a poet  and  a musi- 
cian of  high  order.  From  1561  he  was  Master  of  the  Chapel  Royal,  a post 
then  involving  dramatic  as  well  as  musical  gifts.  His  madrigals  are  famous. 

Robert  Whyte  (d.  1574)  was  highly  esteemed  in  his  time,  but  strangely 
forgotten  afterwards.  He  succeeded  Tye  at  Ely  in  1562,  removing  to  West- 


L 


146 


THE  SIXTEENTH  CENTURY 


minster  in  1567.  He  is  supposed  to  have  been  Tye's  son-in-law.  He  left 
numerous  motets  and  anthems,  with  some  instrumental  fantasias,  all  showing 
great  ability. 

Richard  Farrant  (d.  1580)  was  in  the  Chapel  Royal  from  1564.  His  ser- 
vices and  anthems  (some  possibly  by  other  Farrants),  with  20  organ-pieces, 
show  him  a worthy  contemporary  of  Tye  and  Tallis. 

William  Byrd  (d.  1623),  born  in  1543  and  a pupil  of  Tallis,  became 
organist  at  Lincoln  in  1563,  was  in  the  Chapel  Royal  from  1570  and  later 
its  organist,  and  was  joint-publisher  with  Tallis  from  1575,  succeeding  to  the 
monopoly  in  1585.  He  was  often  in  trouble  because  of  his  strong  Catholic 
sympathies.  Though  perhaps  not  absolutely  unexcelled  at  every  point,  his 
works  (from  1575)  are  so  many,  varied  and  superior  that  he  is  counted  not 
only  the  greatest  English  composer  of  the  century,  but  a compeer  of  Pale- 
strina and  Lassus.  The  list  includes  masses,  motets,  anthems,  psalms,  madri- 
gals, songs  and  remarkable  virginal-pieces,  including  some  true  variations. 
As  an  instrumental  writer  he  was  long  unrivaled. 

John  Bull  (d.  1628),  born  about  1562,  was  organist  at  Hereford  from  1582, 
soon  entered  the  Chapel  Royal  and  in  1591  became  its  organist,  and  in 
1597-1607  was  the  first  professor  of  music  at  Gresham  College.  In  1601 
he  traveled  on  the  Continent  as  a virtuoso,  and  in  1613  migrated  to  Brussels, 
becoming  in  1617  organist  at  Antwerp  Cathedral.  He  was  a remarkable  per- 
former, an  expert  contrapuntist  and  a prolific  composer  of  keyboard-pieces 
of  decided  historic  importance. 

Italian  madrigals  began  to  be  reprinted  in  England  in  1588  and  strengthened 
the  national  interest  in  secular  composition.  Under  this  stimulus  a long 
series  of  further  composers  appeared  (see  sec.  69),  though  the  earlier  of  them 
were  immediately  connected  with  those  here  mentioned. 


CHAPTER  IX 


SECULAR  MUSIC.  INSTRUMENTS.  THEORY 

69.  The  Madrigal  and  Part-Song.  — The  early  indebtedness 
of  the  Netherlanders  to  secular  music  has  already  been  noted 
(sec.  43),  and  the  number  of  chansons  that  they  produced  side 
by  side  with  more  pretentious  works.  This  aspect  of  early 
counterpoint  was  never  lost.  But  it  was  reserved  for  their  dis- 
ciples in  the  16th  century  to  lift  it  into  prominence  and  thus  to 
transform  the  spirit  of  all  composition.  In  the  hands  of  certain 
Italian  masters  both  the  French  chanson  and  its  analogue, 
the  Italian  frottola,  passed  over  into  the  madrigal,  which  steadily 
advanced  into  a distinct  and  brilliant  history  of  its  own. 

The  word  * madrigal’  came  from  the  Troubadours  and  meant  originally 
a pastoral  song,  but  in  later  usage  it  was  applied  to  any  lyric  poem  of 
decided  artistic  value.  Its  musical  sense  followed  when  such  poems  were 
taken  as  texts  for  vocal  treatment. 

The  madrigal  was  simply  the  lighter  and  gayer  type  of 
standard  part-writing.  Its  spirit  came  from  secular  poetry, 
which,  especially  in  Italy,  was  learning  how  to  set  forth  topics  of 
sentiment,  wit  or  passion  in  the  language  of  common  life  with 
delicacy  and  charm.  The  lyric  beauty  of  the  words  called  for 
lyric  music,  but  this,  in  the  absence  of  any  due  recognition  of 
the  artistic  solo,  could  only  be  supplied  contrapuntally,  though,  to 
match  the  sparkle  and  play  of  the  words,  evidently  there  needed 
to  be  some  departure  from  the  ponderous  style  of  the  motet.  It 
was  natural  that  the  Italians  should  lead  in  developing  this 
lighter  style. 

No  strict  definition  of  the  madrigal -form  is  possible,  simply  because  in 
all  the  older  counterpoint  what  is  now  called  ‘form’  was  either  lacking 
or  extremely  irregular.  The  laying  out  of  the  music  was  governed  by  the 
flow  and  balance  of  the  text,  though  without  any  close  adherence  to  the 
mere  syllables  or  lines.  Indeed,  though  occasionally  the  advance  of 
the  voices  might  be  checked  and  then  begin  again,  real  strophe-like  divi- 
sions were  usually  avoided.  The  counterpoint  was  sometimes  developed 
about  a borrowed  ‘subject,’  but  usually  passed  from  theme  to  theme, 
specially  devised  for  the  phrases  of  the  words  as  they  came,  each  then 

1 17 


148 


THE  SIXTEENTH  CENTURY 


handled  imitatively,  often  with  strictness  and  dexterity,  but  aiming  con- 
stantly at  beauty  of  effect  rather  than  a show  of  learning.  Properly  a 
madrigal  was  based  upon  one  of  the  mediaeval  modes,  but  with  the 
gradual  change  of  view  about  harmony  usage  tended  toward  the  modern 
major  or  minor,  with  points  of  real  modulation.  In  later  examples  the 
rhythmic  side  of  the  form  became  more  definite,  catching  more  or  less  of 
dance-movement.  Many  a license  of  treatment  crept  into  the  madrigal 
before  it  was  accepted  in  stricter  writing. 

The  historic  importance  of  the  madrigal  is  evident.  It  raised 
secular  music  to  honor  and  afforded  a chance  for  genius  to  ex- 
ercise itself  in  fields  otherwise  untouched.  Although  essen- 
tially polyphonic,  it  really  prepared  the  way  for  other  vocal 
forms,  even  for  dramatic  monodies  and  arias,  since  it  revealed 
the  expressive  possibilities  of  melody.  The  earliest  attempts  at 
dramatic  construction  were  chains  of  madrigals,  and  in  the  early 
opera  madrigals  were  long  a usual  feature.  In  both  Germany 
and  England  it  amalgamated  with  the  true  part-song,  to  the 
latter’s  great  enrichment.  On  the  other  hand,  it  served  as  a 
step  toward  independent  instrumental  music,  which  at  the  out- 
set was  merely  the  transcription  of  what  was  written  to  be 
sung,  but  which  presently  set  off  on  analogous  lines  of  its  own. 
Hence  it  is  just  to  say  that  the  madrigal  was  the  16th-century 
representative  of  what  is  now  called  chamber  music  (Riemann). 

In  a number  of  cases  what  were  called  madrigali  spirituali 
were  put  forth  — motets  in  a style  that  sought  to  bring  into 
church  services  more  of  the  warmth,  flexibility  and  grace  of  sec- 
ular music  than  had  been  customary.  These  prefigured  the  Prot- 
estant motets  and  anthems  of  Germany  and  England. 

The  origin  of  strong  madrigal-writing  was  with  the  Venetians.  Willaert  is 
often  named  as  the  inventor,  but  it  is  impossible  to  say  exactly  who  was  the 
first  writer  in  the  form,  since  it  was  evolved  gradually. 

Among  Petrucci’s  earlier  collections  (1502-8)  were  about  900  frottole  by 
North  Italian  writers,  largely  from  Verona  and  Padua.  These  slight  works 
were  the  forerunners  of  the  madrigal.  Soon  after  1 530,  madrigals  proper  begin 
to  appear  in  print  in  rapidly  increasing  numbers,  the  leading  writers  entering 
the  field  in  about  this  order:  Willaert  in  1519,  Festa  in  1531.  Arcadelt  in  1538, 
A.  della  Viola  in  1539,  Jhan  Gero  in  1542,  De  Rore  in  1542,  Lassus  in  1552,  De 
Monte  and  A.  Gabrieli  in  1554,  Porta  and  Palestrina  in  1555.  Van  Wert  in  1558, 
Striggio  in  1560,  Annibale  in  1562,  Merulo  and  Caimo  in  1564,  G.  Gabrieli  in 
1 575  ?,  G.  M.  Nanino  in  1579.  Marenzio  in  1580,  Monteverdi  in  1583.  Orazio 
Vecchi  and  G.B.  Nanino  in  1586,  and  the  German  Hassler  in  1590.  This  list 
gives  but  a hint  of  the  magnitude  of  the  subject,  since  almost  every  active  writer 
in  Italy  was  a madrigalist,  and  the  fertility  of  several  of  them  was  enormous. 


THE  ENGLISH  MADRIGALISTS 


149 


All  the  above  have  been  noted  in  earlier  sections  except  Monteverdi  (see 
sec.  77)  and  Luca  Marenzio  (d.  1599),  who  was  born  near  Brescia  and  a pupil 
there  of  Contino,  in  the  service  of  Cardinal  Luigi  d’  Este,  first  at  Triest 
and  from  1580  at  Rome,  where  from  1595  he  was  organist  in  the  Papal  Chapel. 
Although  also  a sacred  writer,  his  renown  rests  on  his  incomparable  madrigals, 
canzonette  and  villanelle  (almost  20  vols.  from  1580). 

The  English  development  of  the  madrigal  was  prompt  and 
rich,  but  marked  by  an  instinctive  effort  to  merge  the  madrigal 
proper  with  the  lighter  and  gayer  styles  of  the  part-song  and 
the  dance.  For  convenience,  the  more  famous  writers  are  here 
grouped  together,  though  their  activity  reached  far  into  the 
17th  century. 

The  earliest  MS.  specimens  date  from  about  1560,  but  the  greater  number 
come  after  1590,  being  stimulated  by  reprints  of  Italian  works.  During  the 
next  40  years  about  2000  madrigals  were  published,  and  more  remain  in  MS. 
In  many  cases  competent  composers  wrote  little  else,  so  that  at  the  opening  of 
the  17th  century  the  English  school  really  devoted  itself  to  this  form.  To 
the  pioneers  Edwards  and  Byrd,  already  mentioned,  the  following  should  be 
added : — 

Thomas  Morley  (d.  c.  1602),  born  in  1557  and  a pupil  of  Byrd,  entered  the 
Chapel  Royal  in  1592,  after  being  for  a time  organist  at  St.  Paul’s,  and 
succeeded  to  Byrd’s  monopoly  in  1598.  His  canzonets  (from  1593),  mad- 
rigals (from  1594),  ballets  (1595)  and  ayres  (1600)  constitute  the  best  of  his 
work,  though  his  instrumental  pieces  and  limited  sacred  music  are  also  notable. 
His  theoretical  treatise  (159 7)  was  influential. 

John  Dowland  (d.  1626),  born  in  1563,  was  exclusively  a secular  composer, 
and  famous  as  a virtuoso  upon  the  lute.  Partly  because  of  his  Catholic 
associations  in  early  life,  he  spent  much  time  abroad  from  1580,  visiting 
France,  Germany  and  Italy,  besides  being  employed  in  1598-1606  with  peculiar 
honors  at  the  Danish  court.  On  returning  to  England,  he  held  two  or  three 
positions,  the  last  as  court-lutist.  His  madrigals  and  ayres  (1596-1621)  have 
remained  in  use  to  the  present.  He  also  issued  a popular  set  of  instrumental 
pavans  (1605)  and  a translation  of  Ornithoparchus’  book  (1609),  with  a short 
addition  of  his  own. 

George  Kirbye  (d.  1634)  is  known  from  one  book  of  fine  madrigals  (1597) 
and  others  scattered  in  collections  or  MS.  Thomas  Weelkes,  who  also 
entered  the  field  with  success  in  1597  with  several  books,  was  organist 
successively  at  Winchester  College  and  at  Chichester.  John  Wilbye  gained 
the  title  of  ‘the  chief  of  English  madrigalists ’ by  some  65  famous  specimens 
(from  1598).  John  Bennet  issued  one  book  (1599)  of  exquisite  beauty,  with 
some  other  pieces,  including  a few  anthems  and  hymn-tunes  (till  1614). 
Thomas  Bateson  (d.  1630),  organist  at  Chester  from  1599  and  at  Dublin  from 
1609,  was  almost  equally  expert  (works,  1604-18).  Michael  Este,  choirmaster 
at  Lichfield,  not  only  wrote  many  fine  madrigals  (1604-38),  but  considerable 
instrumental  music  and  some  anthems.  Francis  Pilkington  was  connected 
with  Chester  Cathedral  (ayres  and  madrigals,  1605-24).  Thomas  Ford  (d. 


THE  SIXTEENTH  CENTURY 


150 

1648),  music-master  in  the  royal  household  and  in  the  Chapel  from  1625,  was 
both  a secular  composer  (from  1607)  and  a writer  of  anthems  (in  MS.). 

Thomas  Ravenscroft  (d.  1635?),  born  about  1582  and  a choirboy  at  St. 
Paul’s,  though  not  greater  than  several  of  the  foregoing,  exerted  a wider  in- 
fluence through  his  madrigals  (from  1609),  motets  and  canons,  his  collection 
of  tunes  (1621)  and  his  treatise  ( 1 61 1 ) on  Measured  Music. 

Orlando  Gibbons  (d.  1625),  born  in  1583  and  a choirboy  at  King’s  College, 
Cambridge,  organist  at  the  Chapel  Royal  from  1604  and  at  Westminster  Abbey 
from  1623,  is  by  far  the  greatest  name  in  the  series  after  Byrd.  His  abun- 
dant works  (from  1611)  range  from  services,  anthems  and  hymn-tunes  to  re- 
markable madrigals  and  instrumental  pieces  (see  also  sec.  99). 

While  musicians  were  thus  discovering  the  latent  capacities 
of  the  madrigal  as  a branch  of  counterpoint,  what  are  more 
properly  called  ‘ part-songs  ’ were  not  neglected  and,  especially 
in  Germany,  were  often  still  more  cultivated.  The  part-song 
differs  from  the  madrigal  in  derivation  and  character,  being 
primarily  an  attempt  to  arrange  a folk-song  or  similar  melody 
for  three  or  more  voices  with  little  more  than  note-for-note 
part-writing.  The  madrigal  was  the  secular  counterpart  of  the 
motet,  the  part-song  the  companion  of  the  chorale.  In  the  lat- 
ter there  was  usually  a continuous  dominating  melody  in  either 
the  tenor  or  the  treble,  a division  into  lines  or  strophes  with 
cadences,  and  a tendency  to  use  the  form  over  and  over  for 
successive  stanzas,  while  the  harmonic  basis  was  not  confined 
to  the  ecclesiastical  modes.  Yet  in  practice  everywhere  the 
madrigal  and  the  part-song  lay  so  close  together  that  they 
influenced  each  other  and  often  coalesced. 

Thus  in  Italy  the  ‘villanella’  or  ‘villota’  was  explicitly  a part-song 
based  upon  a popular  air,  and  even  the  ‘frottola’  was  not  strictly  a 
contrapuntal  form,  though  developed  thus  for  a time.  In  Germany  true 
part-songs  were  the  rule  and  reached  a notable  prominence  with  both 
secular  and  sacred  words.  In  France  and  the  Low  Countries  the  ‘chanson’ 
often  veered  toward  the  part-song,  probably  reverting  thus  to  its  primitive 
type.  In  England  the  line  between  the  madrigal  and  the  part-song  was 
always  fluctuating,  and  finally  disappeared  in  what  was  called  the  ‘glee.’ 
The  part-song,  then,  illustrates  a process  of  evolution  common  in  16th- 
century  music  — a form  that  originated  almost  within  the  circle  of  un- 
conscious folk-music,  was  adopted  into  artistic  use  without  a full  sense 
of  its  significance,  and  then  proved  so  consonant  with  the  trend  of 
technical  progress  as  to  become  typical.  In  most  countries  the  pursuit 
of  the  strict  madrigal  died  out  in  the  17th  century,  but  the  part-song, 
both  in  its  normal  form  and  with  contrapuntal  elaboration,  has  survived 
with  unlessened  vigor  to  the  present  day. 


THE  FLORENTINE  MONODIES 


51 


70.  The  Florentine  Monodies.  — Throughout  the  later  16th 
century  composers  were  groping  toward  dramatic  music.  So 
long  as  the  only  recognized  type  of  writing  was  contrapuntal, 
nothing  significant  could  be  accomplished,  since  without  the 
solo  the  element  of  personality  in  song  was  kept  at  a minimum. 

Several  experiments  were  tried  with  incidental  music  for  plays  ( inter7nezzi ) 
in  madrigal  style,  as  by  A.  della  Viola  (1541-63),  Striggio  (1565-85),  Merulo 
(1579),  A.  Gabrieli  (1585)  and  Orazio  Vecchi  (1594).  Only  the  last  of  these 
was  specially  successful,  and  one  of  them,  at  the  wedding  of  Duke  Francesco 
of  Tuscany  at  Venice  in  1579,  led  to  a war  of  pamphlets  between  Venetian 
and  Florentine  critics. 

About  1575  there  began  at  Florence  a movement  that  had 
important  consequences.  A wealthy  and  cultivated  nobleman, 
Giovanni  Bardi,  Count  of  Vernio,  himself  a poet  and  amateur 
musician,  drew  about  him  a group  of  dilettanti  in  literature  and 
art  who  were  all  inquiring  after  some  method  of  dramatic  ex- 
pression of  an  intenser  form  than  was  then  known.  Their 
ambition  was  to  restore  the  Greek  drama  in  its  entirety.  This 
raised  the  question  of  musical  declamation  as  a means.  Such 
declamation  was  practically  a lost  art,  and  numerous  attempts 
were  made  to  rediscover  it.  These  experiments  were  called 
1 monodies,’  the  first  of  which  were  simply  recitatives  with  a 
slight  accompaniment. 

The  circle  of  Florentine  dilettanti  was  originally  a social  club  drawn  to- 
gether by  common  tastes,  but  before  long  became  animated  by  a positive 
purpose  of  revolution  in  the  direction  of  solo  music.  The  chief  names,  besides 
Bardi,  were  Jacopo  Corsi  (d.  1604),  a rich  patron  of  the  arts  and  a good  player 
on  the  gravicembalo,  who  from  1592  was  the  head  of  the  movement,  Bardi 
having  moved  to  Rome ; the  poet  Ottavio  Rinuccini  (d.  1621),  afterwards  most 
serviceable  as  librettist ; Emilio  del  Cavaliere  (d.  1602),  a Roman  noble,  at  the 
time  Ducal  Inspector  of  Art  at  Florence,  who  was  well  versed  in  musical  work 
and  later  one  of  the  composers  in  the  new  style  ; Vincenzo  Galilei  (d.  c.  1600), 
not  so  famous  as  his  son,  the  astronomer,  but  a talented  lutist  and  a good 
student  and  writer,  who  led  the  way  in  practical  experiments  and  zeal- 
ously defended  the  new  ideas  in  pamphlets  (from  1581);  Giulio  Caccini 
(d.  1618),  singer  in  the  Ducal  Chapel  from  1565  and  a lutist  whose  versatile 
skill  powerfully  aided  the  movement;  Jacopo  Peri  (d.  1633),  also  a well- 
trained  musician,  ducal  choirmaster  at  Florence  and  later  at  Ferrara,  who  like- 
wise served  notably  as  a composer  in  the  new  style  ; Pietro  Strozzi,  who  took 
part  with  Merulo  and  Striggio  in  the  wedding  music  at  Venice  mentioned 
above  and  later  heartily  accepted  the  new  ideas  ; Marco  da  Gagliano  (d.  1642), 
at  the  time  a young  student  for  the  priesthood,  but  later  a composer  in  the 
piopodic  form. 


52 


THE  SIXTEENTH  CENTURY 


Galilei  and  Caccini  were  probably  the  first  to  write  monodies,  with  such 
success  that  by  1585  attention  was  strongly  attracted  to  what  seemed  like  a 
new  style  of  decided  value.  Just  what  these  monodies  were  is  not  clear,  but 
they  certainly  contained  the  germ  of  both  the  recitative  and  the  aria. 

The  monodic  style  was  at  once  applied  in  musical  plays,  with 
plot  and  personages.  After  some  tentative  essays  (with  more 
or  less  madrigal  material),  in  1 594  was  produced  the  first  real 
musical  drama,  Dafne , with  words  by  Rinuccini  and  music  by 
Peri  and  Caccini,  followed  in  1600  by  two  more  significant  works, 
commonly  known  as  ‘ the  first  opera  ’ and  ‘ the  first  oratorio  ’ 
respectively  (see  sec.  76). 

71.  Instruments  and  Instrumental  Music.  — The  16th  cen- 

tury  inherited  from  its  predecessors  a bewildering  variety  of  in- 
struments, most  of  which  it  continued  to  use,  pending  the  time 
when  experience  should  determine  which  contained  the  largest 
artistic  possibilities.  The  keyboard  instruments  — the  organ, 
clavichord,  harpsichord  and  their  relatives  — stood  in  a class  by 
themselves,  having  obvious  capacity  for  concerted  effects.  The 
remaining  forms  were  small  and  portable,  representing  the 
standard  stringed,  wind  and  percussive  groups.  These  were 
utilized  variously,  and  the  artistic  importance  of  some  of  them, 
especially  the  lute  and  the  viol,  were  more  and  more  perceived. 

Virdung’s  Musica  getutscht  (1511)  is  an  invaluable  source  on  this  sub- 
ject near  the  opening  of  the  century,  giving  both  descriptions  and  wood- 
cuts.  His  list  includes,  besides  the  keyboard  instruments  (omitting  the 
harpsichord  proper),  in  the  stringed  group,  the  lyra  (hurdy-gurdy),  two 
forms  of  lute,  two  viols  (tenor  and  bass),  harp,  psaltery,  hackbrett  (dulci- 
mer) and  trumscheit  (nun’s-fiddle)  ; in  the  wind  group,  the  schalmey  and 
bombarde  (oboes),  several  varieties  of  flute  or  recorder,  zinken,  cromornes 
and  other  horns,  bagpipes,  trumpet,  clarion  and  trombone ; and  among 
percussives,  drums  and  some  nondescript  forms.  Other  similar  sources 
are  Agricola’s  Musica  instrumentalis  (1528)  and,  about  a century  after 
Virdung,  Pratorius’  Syntagma  musician  (1615-9),  which  latter  is  the 
most  elaborate  of  all. 

The  lute  was  the  characteristic  instrument  of  the  period,  since 
it  gave  opportunity  for  concerted  effects  and  for  variety  of  force 
and  color.  Much  pains  were  taken  with  its  construction.  All 
kinds  of  music  were  arranged  for  it,  most  musicians  sought  pro- 
ficiency in  playing  it,  and  socially  it  was  more  fashionable  than 
any  other  instrument.  That  it  contributed  powerfully  to  the 


INSTRUMENTAL  MUSIC 


153 


awakening  of  a taste  for  true  instrumental  composition  is  obvi- 
ous, but  its  mechanical  limitations  were  such  that  gradually  it 
was  supplanted  by  the  viol,  though  it  continued  in  some  vogue 
till  the  1 8th  century. 

Its  essential  features  were  an  oval  or  pear-shaped  body,  flat  in  front 
and  vaulted  behind,  strengthened  within  by  a soundpost  under  the 
bridge  and  by  one  or  more  longitudinal  sound- 
bars,  the  belly  being  pierced  by  1-3  carefully 
shaped  and  located  soundholes  and  bearing  the 
bridge  (usually  placed  obliquely  and  to  one  side) 
to  which  the  lower  ends  of  the  strings  were 
fastened;  a neck  of  varying  width  and  length, 
with  a fretted  fingerboard,  and  a head,  either 
flat,  curved  or  bent  sharply  back,  containing  the 
tuning-pegs ; usually  about  13  strings  of  gut  or 
wire,  of  which  the  uppermost  or  chanterelle  was 
single,  but  the  others  tuned  in  pairs,  the  lower 
pairs  being  sometimes  carried  off  at  the  side  of  the 
fingerboard  and  used  without  stopping.  The 
customary  sizes  varied  greatly,  from  the  little 
‘chiterna,1  with  but  4 strings,  up  to  the  big  1 the- 
orbo,’ ‘ archlute  ’ and  1 chitarrone1,  all  properly 
with  a double  or  extended  neck  and  head  and 
20-24  strings.  The  accordatura  or  method  of 
tuning  varied  somewhat,  with  a range  of  3-4 
octaves  or  even  more.  The  tone,  produced  by 
twanging  with  the  finger-tips,  was  incisive  and 
slightly  nasal,  but  was  capable  of  fine  gradations 
in  skillful  hands.  Dexterous  players  got  good 
effects  in  melodies  with  accompaniment,  in  chord- 
sequences  and  even  in  polyphonic  passages.  (The  modern  derivatives  of 
the  lute  are  the  guitar  and  the  mandolin,  the  latter  most  resembling  it 
in  shape.) 

The  viol  was  not  yet  as  much  valued  as  the  lute,  chiefly 
because  incapable  of  concerted  effects,  but  its  unique  singing- 
tone  was  appreciated  and  its  possibilities  were  being  diligently 
studied.  Late  in  the  century  several  varieties  had  become  dis- 
tinct, including  the  true  violin.  Brescia  and  Cremona  in  Lom- 
bardy were  already  the  headquarters  of  the  best  manufacture. 
But  the  full  development  of  viol  music  was  delayed  until  the 
17th  century  (see  secs.  110-112). 

The  recognition  of  instrumental  music  as  distinct  from  vocal 
was  one  of  the  striking  advances  of  the  16th  century.  Previ- 
ously, true  accompaniments  and  all  independent  writing  for 


154 


THE  SIXTEENTH  CENTURY 


Fig.  55. 


Fig.  55.  — Theorbo,  with 
five  pairs  of  strings  off  the 
fingerboard.  Fig.  56.  — Arch- 
lute, also  with  part  of  the 

strings  off  the  fingerboard.  (The  terms  * theorbo  ’ and 
‘ arch-lute  ’ are  used  rather  indiscriminately  for  the  above 
forms.)  Fig.  57.  — Bass-lute  or  Chitarrone,  the  largest  of 
the  lute  family. 


Fig.  57. 


INSTRUMENTAL  MUSIC 


155 


instruments  had  been  either  unknown  or  used  only  casually. 
With  the  unfolding  sense  of  the  range  of  musical  art  this  neg- 
lect could  not  continue.  Two  different  lines  of  experiment  ap- 
peared early  in  the  century  — on  the  one  hand,  contrapuntal 
works  of  the  motet  or  chanson  class  were  written  to  be  either 
sung  or  played  ; and,  on  the  other,  dances  or  similar  pieces  were 
drafted  for  purely  instrumental  use.  In  either  case  the  desire 
was  first  for  concerted  effects  upon  a single  instrument,  but 
the  further  notion  of  combining  instruments  together  followed 
speedily,  though  with  vague  and  shifting  ideas  of  what  combi- 
nations were  most  serviceable.  So  far  as  the  production  of 
particular  works  or  the  settling  of  specific  forms  of  composition 
went,  this  movement  is  significant  only  as  regards  music  for  the 
organ,  but  the  mere  fact  that  a beginning  was  made  in  other 
keyboard  music,  in  pieces  for  the  lute  and  viol,  and  in  rudimen- 
tary chamber  music,  is  important,  since  from  these  tentative 
efforts  came  great  results  later. 

The  earliest  publication  of  lute-music  was  by  Petrucci  (1507-8),  made  up 
largely  of  dances.  An  English  MS.,  presumably  of  earlier  date,  contains  three 
virginal-pieces,  also  in  dance  style.  Printed  lute-books  in  tablature  appeared 
frequently  through  the  century.  Of  these  the  leading  German,  French,  English 
and  other  examples  have  already  been  noted.  It  remains  to  enumerate  a few 
of  the  earlier  Italian  editors:  Francesco  da  Milano  (7  books,  1536-63)  ; Julio 
Abondante  (2  books,  1 546-8,  perhaps  more)  ; Giovanni  Maria  da  Crema  (per- 
haps 3 books,  1546)  ; Melchiore  de  Baberijs  (at  least  9 books,  only  partially 
preserved,  1546-9)  ; Giacomo  Gorzanis  of  Triest  (at  least  4 books,  1564-7). 

Virginal-books  begin  to  be  found  in  England  toward  the  end  of  the  century, 
though  not  in  printed  form,  the  earliest  large  one  being  that  in  the  Fitzwilliam 
Collection,  which  was  once  associated  with  Queen  Elizabeth.  The  real 
pioneer  in  secular  writing  for  the  keyboard  was  Byrd  (d.  1623). 

The  dances  most  in  vogue  were  the  ‘pavan’  (ftadova7io,  from  Padua),  a 
slow  movement  in  duple  rhythm,  with  the  ‘galliard1  ( gaillarde , a gay  or 
merry  piece),  a quick  movement  in  triple  rhythm,  also  called  ‘saltarello’ 
(from  its  springy  steps)  — these  two  being  frequently  united  into  a two- 
movement  form  resembling  the  suite  in  miniature.  The  4 passamezzo 1 or 
4 passepied,’  a triple  movement  prefiguring  the  minuet,  was  also  common, 
with  the  4 allemande 1 (German  dance),  a flowing  movement  in  quadruple 
rhythm.  Other  instrumental  forms  were  of  rambling  structure,  often 
made  up  largely  of  passages,  and  were  variously  called  4 fantasias 1 (or,  in 
England,  ‘fancies’),  ‘ricercari,’  in  which  was  much  thematic  imitation, 
occasionally  approaching  the  fugue,  4 toccate  ’ (pieces  to  be  touched  on  the 
key-board),  or  ‘sonate’  (pieces  to  be  sounded  by  instruments  instead  of 
sung)  — both  of  the  latter  being  usually  of  the  nature  of  free  preludes 
(later  called  4 sinfonie  ’ or  4 ritornelli  ’) . 


*56 


THE  SIXTEENTH  CENTURY 


72.  Literature  about  Music.  — To  give  an  adequate  account 
of  the  many  musical  books  from  the  invention  of  printing  to 
1600  is  here  impracticable.  Fifty  or  more  authors  might  be 
named,  chiefly  Italians  or  Germans,  writing  upon  standard 
subjects  like  Plain-Song,  Solmization,  Counterpoint,  Intervals, 
Notation,  etc.,  with  reference  to  the  practical  needs  of  singers 
and  composers.  A few,  however,  were  constructive  theorists, 
dealing  with  musical  procedure  in  more  than  a routine  or 
annalistic  manner.  There  were  traces,  too,  of  the  dawning 
historic  spirit,  seeking  to  describe  how  the  art  had  been 
evolved  and  how  it  differed  in  different  countries,  with  some 
summaries  of  composers,  works  and  instruments.  Almost  all 
treatises  were  still  written  in  Latin,  and  many  writers  (like 
many  composers)  were  known  under  the  often  curious  Latin 
paraphrases  of  their  real  names. 

Jean  Tinctoris  (d.  1 5 1 1),  choirmaster  in  the  Royal  Chapel  of  Naples  in 
1475-87,  then  in  the  Papal  Chapel  till  1500,  and  finally  at  Nivelles  (Brabant), 
issued  about  1475  ^he  first  printed  dictionary  of  musical  terms  and  left  a large 
number  of  tractates  in  MS.,  besides  some  compositions. 

Franchino  Gafori  (d.  1522),  from  1484  connected  with  Milan  Cathedral, 
published  his  first  treatise  in  1480,  his  greatest  in  1496  and  others  later.  A 
strong  supporter  of  the  older  views  of  theory,  he  was  drawn  into  the  strenuous 
debate  opened  in  1482  by  Bartolomeo  Ramis  de  Pareja,  a Spanish  teacher  at 
Bologna,  later  at  Rome,  to  whom  Nicolb  Burzio  of  Parma  (d.  1518)  responded 
in  1487,  followed  in  1491  by  Ramis’  pupil  Giovanni  Spataro  (d.  1541),  who 
was  then  attacked  by  Gafori  in  1518-20,  and  who  responded  with  emphasis 
in  152 1—3 1 . Ramis  took  positions  about  the  scale,  interval-ratios  and  chro- 
matic tones  that  were  far  ahead  of  his  day,  prefiguring  the  maturer  theory 
of  the  1 8th  century. 

Passing  over  Jacques  Le  Febvre  [Faber  Stapulensis]  (d.  c.  1537),  royal  tutor 
at  Paris  and  later  at  Navarre,  Michael  Keinspeck  of  Nuremberg  (both  writing 
in  1496),  Nicolaus  Wollick  of  Paris  (works,  1501-12),  Joannes  Cochlaeus 
[Joh.  Dobnek  or  Wendelstein]  (d.  1552)  of  Worms,  Mayence,  Frankfort  and 
Breslau  (works,  1507-11),  and  Simon  de  Quercu  of  Vienna  (1509),  we  come  to 

Sebastian  Virdung,  organist  at  Basle,  who  published  in  15 11  (in  German) 
his  invaluable  treatise  on  keyboard  and  other  instruments  (illustrated),  with 
practical  directions  about  notation  and  tablature,  which  Ottomarus  Luscinius 
[Nachtigall]  (d.  c.  1536)  of  Strassburg,  Augsburg  and  Freiburg  translated 
into  Latin  in  1536,  besides  his  own  theoretical  book  in  1515. 

Again  passing  over  Wenceslaus  Philomathes  of  Vienna  (1512)  and  Sebas- 
tian von  Felstein  of  Cracow  (1515),  several  leading  names  follow  : — 

Pietro  Aaron  of  Venice  (d.  1545)  issued  works  ( 1 5 1 6— ’45 ) that  resemble 
Gafori’s  in  scope,  but  take  the  progressive  side  of  the  famous  dispute.  His 
last  work  contains  a list  of  various  musicians,  men  and  women. 


MUSICAL  LITERATURE 


157 


Heinrich  Loriti  [Glarean,  from  his  birthplace  in  Switzerland]  of  Cologne, 
Basle  and  Freiburg  (d.  1563),  published  two  works  (1515, ’47),  the  second  of 
which,  the  Dodecachordon , contains  his  noted  contention  that  the  whole  fabric 
of  mediaeval  music  rests  upon  12  modes  instead  of  8,  as  ordinarily  taught,  with 
many  examples  cited  from  leading  composers  — the  whole  set  forth  with 
acumen  and  clearness.  This  work  was  epitomized  by  his  step-son  Won- 
negger  in  1557.  Glarean  also  edited  the  works  of  Boethius  (1570). 

Andreas  Ornithoparchus,  an  extraordinary  traveler,  is  known  by  his  excel- 
lent general  treatise  (1517),  which  Dowland  translated  into  English  (1609). 

Martin  Agricola  of  Magdeburg  (d.  1556)  by  a series  of  works  (1528-45) 
achieved  a unique  reputation  as  a scholar,  the  first  being  a masterly  account 
of  all  kinds  of  instruments,  and  the  others  discussions  of  theory  and  notation. 
He  also  edited  collections  of  Protestant  music.  With  him  worked  Georg 
Rhaw  (d.  1548),  the  enterprising  Wittenberg  publisher,  who  himself  issued 
a theoretical  handbook  (1518). 

Sebald  Heyden  of  Nuremberg  (d.  1561)  issued  important  treatises  on  men- 
sural music  (1532,  ’37),  besides  psalms  and  a Passion. 

Ludovico  Fogliani  of  Rome  (d.  1539)  was  a careful  student  of  ancient  musi- 
cal writings,  and  is  notable  for  a work  (1529)  in  which  the  major  third  is 
correctly  fixed  with  the  ratio  5 : 4,  as  against  the  prevalent  Pythagorean  theory, 
with  other  useful  acoustical  distinctions.  (Cf.  Ramis  above.) 

Names  of  less  significance  are  Hans  Judenkunig  of  Vienna  (d.  1526),  with 
a text-book  for  the  lute  (1523)  ; Stefano  Vanneo  of  Ascoli  (1533)  ; Matheo 
de  Aranda  of  Portugal  (1533)  ; Silvestro  di  Ganassi  of  Venice,  with  methods 
for  the  flute-a-bec,  viola  and  violone  (1535-43)  ; Antonio  Francesco  Doni 
(d.  1574),  a cultivated  Florentine,  author  of  two  books  (1544-50),  the  second 
of  which  is  a valuable  bibliography  of  Italian  musical  books  and  MSS. ; Hein- 
rich Faber  of  Naumburg  (d.  1552),  with  very  popular  handbooks  (1548-50), 
the  earlier  of  which  was  expanded  by  Gumpeltzhaimer  of  Augsburg  (1591) 
and  by  Vulpius  of  Weimar  (1610)  ; Juan  Bermudo  of  Portugal,  on  instruments 
(1549) ; Adrian  Petit  Coclicus  of  Wittenberg  and  Nuremberg  (d.  1563),  pupil 
of  Des  Pres  and  ex-member  of  the  Papal  Chapel  (1552);  and  Hermann 
Finck  (d.  1558)  of  Wittenberg  (1556). 

Nicolb  Vicentino,  a pupil  of  Willaert  in  the  service  of  the  Este  family  at 
Ferrara  and  Rome,  in  his  enthusiasm  over  the  revival  of  the  Greek  chromatic 
and  enharmonic  genera,  was  opposed  by  the  Portuguese  Vicente  Lusitano 
(1551),  and,  though  unsuccessful  in  a public  debate,  defended  his  views  in  a 
book  (1 555)  and  by  the  invention  of  the  complicated  ‘archicembalo,1  thus  help- 
ing forward  the  reaction  against  the  older  diatonic  theory  of  the  modes.  The 
chief  arbiter  of  the  debate  was  Ghiselin  Danckerts,  a Netherlander  in  the 
Papal  Chapel,  who  left  a written  opinion  (1551),  which  about  a half-century 
later  was  indorsed  by  Artusi  (see  below). 

Gioseffo  Zarlino  (d.  1590),  the  Venetian  composer  and  choirmaster  (see 
sec.  56),  was  altogether  the  greatest  theorist  of  the  age.  His  works  (1558-88) 
for  the  first  time  wrought  out  the  distinction  between  the  major  and  the  minor 
as  two  complementary  types  of  harmonic  structure  (developed  with  great  full- 


58 


THE  SIXTEENTH  CENTURY 


ness  in  the  19th  century),  and  set  forth  the  principles  of  counterpoint  in  its 
higher  and  more  intricate  applications,  with  numerous  illustrative  examples. 

Antonius  Gogavinus,  a Flemish  physician  in  Venice,  deserves  special 
mention  as  the  first  editor  of  important  Greek  treatises  (1552). 

Franciscus  Salinas  (d.  1590),  court-organist  at  Naples  from  1558  and  later 
of  Salamanca  (Spain),  issued  in  1577  a finely  written  treatise  in  which  musical 
rhythm  is  discussed  in  relation  to  rhythm  in  poetry,  aiming  to  develop  the 
ancient  theories  as  the  author  understood  them. 

Vincenzo  Galilei  of  Florence  (d.  c.  1600),  in  his  zeal  for  a return  to  the 
dramatic  monody  of  the  Greeks,  published  several  works  against  Zarlino 
(1581-9)  in  connection  with  the  memorable  Florentine  movement,  besides  an 
earlier  book  on  lute-playing  (1568). 

William  Bathe  (d.  1614),  an  Irish  Jesuit  of  Salamanca,  is  known  from  a 
handbook  (1584)  in  which,  among  other  things,  the  octave  is  accepted  in  place 
of  the  hexachord  as  the  norm  of  scales. 

Giovanni  Maria  Artusi  of  Bologna  (d.  1613),  an  industrious  but  highly 
conservative  writer,  issued  extensive  works  (1586-1603)  in  which  he  vainly 
strove  to  check  the  tendencies  away  from  the  strict  counterpoint  of  the  old 
school. 

Cyriak  Schneegass  of  Friedrichsroda  (d.  1597)  was  a somewhat  useful  writer 
of  small  text-books  (1590-2),  the  first  of  which  was  the  earliest  printed  work 
on  the  monochord. 

Sethus  Calvisius  (d.  1615),  from  1582  the  distinguished  cantor  at  Schul- 
pforta  (near  Naumburg)  and  from  1594  at  Leipsic,  issued  several  able  books 
(1592-1612),  one  of  which  contains  an  advocacy  of  bocedization,  while  part  of 
another  is  devoted  to  a genuine  history  of  music.  He  was  useful  in  directing 
thought  into  harmonic  channels. 

Lodovico  Zacconi  of  Venice  (d.  1627),  also  for  a time  in  court  service  at 
Vienna  and  Munich,  published  in  two  widely  separated  parts  (1592,  1622)  a 
celebrated  treatise  on  contrapuntal  composition,  including  a valuable  account 
of  instruments. 

Ercole  Bottrigari  of  Ferrara  and  Bologna  (d.  1612),  an  erudite  classical 
scholar,  wrote  three  elaborate  works  (1593-1602)  designed  to  combat  views 
held  by  various  friends  about  harmonic  questions,  the  third  reasserting  Vicen- 
tino’s  contention  about  chromatic  tones.  He  also  left  in  MS.  extensive 
other  writings,  including  translations  of  ancient  authors  and  a work  on  the 
theatre. 

Girolamo  Diruta  (d.  after  1612)  issued  in  two  parts  (1593,1609)  an  elaborate 
discussion  of  organ-playing  — an  indication  of  the  advance  in  that  branch  of 
music. 

Thomas  Morley  (d.  c.  1602),  the  noted  madrigalist,  shares  with  Bathe  the 
honor  of  leading  the  way  in  England  with  a general  theoretical  work  (1597) 
which  exerted  a wide  influence. 

Cyriak  Spangenberg  of  Strassburg  (d.  1604)  is  to  be  remembered  for  an 
important  MS.  work  on  the  Meistersinger  (1598),  which  was  first  published 
in  1861. 


SUMMARY  OF  THE  CENTURY 


159 


73.  Summary  of  the  Century.  — The  most  salient  external 
feature  of  the  16th  century  is  the  sudden  expansion  in  magni- 
tude of  the  world  of  music.  Composers  of  importance  now 
number  some  hundreds  — almost  as  many  as  in  the  17th 
century  — and  they  are  scattered  through  all  the  leading 
countries.  Their  known  works  count  up  into  the  thousands, 
chiefly  designed  for  the  church,  but  with  a goodly  proportion 
of  secular  compositions  as  well.  The  forms  adopted  are  often 
extended  and  complex,  so  that  into  many  single  works  went  a 
large  amount  of  effort  and  skill.  In  mere  bulk  of  composition, 
then,  the  century  is  marked  by  an  outburst  of  extraordinary 
artistic  abundance. 

But  other  features  command  attention.  The  period  was 
instinct  with  the  spirit  of  enterprise.  Musicians  were  not 
content  to  go  on  doing  the  like  of  what  had  been  done,  but 
must  needs  strike  out  new  paths.  Even  those  wedded  to  the 
old  lines  of  ritual  composition  usually  supplemented  or  modified 
the  old  methods,  and  the  few  ultra-conservatives  were  unable 
to  hold  a following.  The  area  of  strict  counterpoint,  for  ex- 
ample, was  widened  in  various  ways  — by  increasing  the  vocal 
forces  and  gathering  them  in  contrasted  choirs,  by  cunningly 
developing  new  beauties  of  close  imitation  (even  by  novel 
applications  of  the  pure  canon),  by  introducing  more  frequent 
harmonic  passages  as  a foil  for  polyphony,  by  heightening 
the  expressiveness  of  individual  voice-parts  and  playing  them 
off  against  each  other  more  effectively,  by  reaching  out  after 
revolutionary  extensions  of  the  modes  through  chromatic  tones, 
by  experimenting  with  alternating  tonalities  or  modulations, 
and  by  adopting  into  serious  writing  rhythmic  and  accentual 
refinements  from  secular  sources. 

The  practice  of  what  was  called  ‘ musica  ficta1  reached  its  climax  in  this 
century.  This  was  an  instinctive  recognition  that  chromatic  modifications 
of  the  modes  were  not  only  permissible  but  necessary  in  certain  situations, 
both  for  the  better  forming  of  the  melodic  phrases  and  for  the  smoother 
articulation  of  the  harmonic  drift.  At  first  the  insertion  of  irregular  semi- 
tones was  left  to  the  singers’  discretion  without  written  mark,  but  ultimately 
the  necessary  sharps  or  flats  were  written  above  or  in  the  staff.  It  is  im- 
possible to  tell  how  early  or  how  far  this  license  was  applied  before  1500, 
but  from  that  date  it  became  the  subject  of  formal  rules,  especially  in  the 
formation  of  final  or  other  cadences,  in  final  chords  (making  them  regu- 
larly major),  in  cases  where  the  tritone  or  other  objectionable  intervals 


i6o 


THE  SIXTEENTH  CENTURY 


occurred  either  melodically  or  harmonically,  and  in  the  treatment  of  thirds 
and  sixths  in  certain  connections. 

All  regular  composition  had  been  for  voices  in  chorus.  It 
now  began  to  be  seen  that  the  chorus  of  instrumental  tones 
was  equally  valid.  Instrumental  writing  branched  off  from 
vocal  with  timidity,  at  first  following  the  vocal  type  slavishly, 
but  presently  noting  that  every  instrument  capable  of  concerted 
effects  has  a genius  of  its  own,  so  that  a piece  for  organ, 
virginal  or  lute  ought  to  be  essentially  diverse  from  one  for 
a choir,  since  the  tonal  and  mechanical  elements  are  different. 
While  instrumental  styles  for  a time  floundered  helplessly  in 
their  search  for  proper  forms  or  types,  the  future  of  such  styles 
as  a great  department  of  musical  art  was  prefigured  in  the 
lute-music,  the  organ-fantasias  and  the  clavichord-dances  of 
this  experimental  period. 

Furthermore,  the  genuine  harmonic  idea  of  composition  now 
disengaged  itself  from  the  purely  contrapuntal,  and  the  hand- 
ling of  tones  in  simultaneous  masses  or  chords  was  felt  to  be 
of  importance.  The  old  notion  had  been  that  the  individual 
voice  in  its  progress  was  the  unit  of  reference  and  that  what 
chords  were  produced  were  incidental.  Now  it  was  felt  that 
the  chord  as  such  was  another  unit  and  that  such  massive 
units  might  be  joined  in  series,  making  the  voice-part  motion 
incidental  to  the  harmonic  sequence.  Thus  a revolution  of 
procedure  gradually  came  to  pass  — one  that  did  not  so  much 
destroy  or  drive  out  the  old  as  reveal  a deeper  principle  with 
which  the  old  might  be  associated  without  losing  its  own 
value. 

Associated  with  this  recognition  of  chords  as  working  units  was  a new 
analysis  of  scales  and  tonality,  whereby  was  disclosed  the  imperfection  of 
the  modes  as  formulas  (embodying  the  ancient  tetrachordal  idea)  and  of 
the  hexachords.  Room  was  made  for  the  instinct  of  secular  music  for 
major  or  minor  scales  laid  out  in  octochords  (or  heptachords),  with  a 
positive  keytone,  a cadential  leading-tone,  and  a dominant  and  subdomi- 
nant that  were  accessory  chord-centres  with  the  tonic.  Hitherto  melodic 
procedure  had  rested  on  arbitrary  assumptions  as  to  the  principality  of 
tones ; now  it  circled  inevitably  about  natural  foci  to  which  certain 
primary  chords  belonged.  Melody  and  harmony  were  thus  found  to  be 
twin  faces  of  the  one  truth  of  tonality.  The  unique  importance  of  the 
leading-tone  as  establishing  the  tonic  and  providing  for  obvious  cadences 
now  attained  its  full  significance. 


SUMMARY  OF  THE  CENTURY 


l6l 


The  acknowledgment  of  a full  scale  with  its  absolute  tonality  as  a unit 
of  thought  led  onward  toward  a still  more  momentous  possibility.  If  a 
cluster  of  tones  might  be  thus  unified  about  a single  centre,  it  followed 
that  by  altering  one  or  two  of  them  the  centre  could  be  changed,  and, 
since  the  alteration  might  be  smoothly  introduced,  a fresh  sort  of  progress 
might  be  worked  out,  whereby,  besides  passing  from  chord  to  chord,  the 
harmony  might  move  from  scale  to  scale  or  from  key  to  key  without  losing 
continuity  and  with  a decided  gain  in  expressional  and  structural  value. 
Though  the  modern  theory  of  free  modulation  in  all  directions  was  still  im- 
possible, owing  to  current  methods  of  tuning,  yet  definite  advances  toward 
it  now  began. 

The  increasing  study  of  popular  music  tended  constantly  to 
alter  theory  in  other  ways.  It  brought  to  the  front  the  question 
of  ‘form’ — the  lay-out  of  movements  in  sections  or  phrases, 
each  with  some  completeness  in  itself,  and  all  with  some  definite 
relation  of  length  to  the  others.  This  was  directly  opposed  to 
the  genius  of  contrapuntal  structure  as  usually  conceived,  and 
was  probably  resisted  as  vulgar  and  mechanical.  But  its  utility 
as  a principle  of  organization  gradually  became  clear,  especially 
in  lighter  composition.  In  dances  and  popular  songs  it  was 
indispensable.  The  problem  was  to  use  it  without  sacrificing 
the  general  continuity  and  unity  of  the  whole  movement.  This 
higher  unity,  it  was  already  seen,  could  be  secured  only  through 
resemblances  or  contrasts  of  melodic  and  harmonic  design  be- 
tween successive  strophes. 

Popular  music  also  brought  into  view  the  artistic  possibilities 
of  the  solo.  Not  only  might  a melody  have  beauty  in  itself  and 
be  highly  expressive,  but,  as  the  doctrine  of  tonality  unfolded, 
it  appeared  that  a melody  carried  within  itself  the  implication 
of  an  harmonic  sequence,  which  was  its  essence.  This  threw  a 
new  light  upon  accompaniments,  showing  that  the  primary 
office  of  the  latter  was  not  to  supply  further  independent 
melody,  but  to  declare  the  chord-foundation  that  the  melody 
implied. 

This  chord-foundation,  it  was  found,  could  be  outlined  by  means  of  a 
continuous  bass  upon  which  the  desired  chord-series  could  be  built  up  in 
accordance  with  a few  simple  rules.  To  suggest  a whole  effect,  then,  it 
was  necessary  only  to  indicate  the  intended  melody  and  the  appropriate 
bass  with  some  conventional  signs  attached,  and  the  proper  harmony  could 
be  supplied  at  sight.  This  was  the  principle  of  the  ‘ basso  continuo  ’ or 
‘thorough-bass’  that  came  into  use  immediately  after  1600. 

M 


162  THE  SIXTEENTH  CENTURY 

Finally,  attention  to  structure  as  defined  by  melody  wrought 
a revolution  from  polyphony,  as  the  primary  type  of  design,  to 
monophony.  Perhaps  strictly  this  was  hardly  a revolution,  since 
polyphony  presupposed  a melodic  ‘ subject,’  yet  practically 
the  shift  of  emphasis  from  a mesh  of  many  voice-parts  to  the 
thought  that  at  every  point  there  should  be  a dominating  melody, 
to  which  all  else  should  contribute,  was  indescribably  novel. 
Here  lay  the  key  to  full  lyric  and  dramatic  expression,  and  until 
this  key  was  in  hand,  entrance  into  the  whole  vast  field  of  the 
artistic  aria  and  of  the  lyric  drama  was  impossible. 


A V A 1<  I A 

Ratisbon/tT\_ 


o Stuttgart 


Passau 


Vienna 


uaffhausen 


T Salzburg 


Innsbrucl 


Zurich 


^Lucerne 


o Berne 


s W IT  Z 

Freiburg  ° TJ: 


Trent 


Laibach. 


jpjmo  / ( 7 j 

0 M u A irfl)  V /)  f X 
S J He r^auuf/  / VicenzaN 

’ V oMijaii  Breia-^  °\ 

Padua 


£>Veuicc 

[Chioggia 


Fiume 


Crenioi 


-iacenza  ^ 
Parma  o 


Modena  ° 
Bologna  ° 


Ravenna 


Jniola  ° J 
■v  Faenza 


Lucca 


.Pesaro 


Pisa 

Leghorn 


Ancona 


Sienna 


Perugia 


>Y  ^ Terni  E' 


►KSIC. 


Trani 


Foggia 

Bcnevento 


-ellino 


^Palermo 


-M.es/in  a 


'Catania 


SCALE  OF  MILES 


Longitude  East  from  Greenwich 


Map  II.  — Italy,  Austria  and  South  Germany. 


PART  IV 


THE  SEVENTEENTH 


CENTURY 


PART  IV 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


Chap.  X.  The  Early  Musical 
Drama. 

74.  General  Survey. 

75.  The  Mediaeval  Plays. 

76.  Musical  Experiments. 

77.  Monteverdi. 

78.  The  Intermezzi. 

79.  Cavalli,  Carissimi  and  Cesti. 

80.  The  Early  Operas  as  Dramas. 

81.  The  Earlier  Venetian  Opera- 

Writers. 

82.  The  Early  Oratorio. 

Chap.  XI.  The  Expansion  of 
Dramatic  Music. 

83.  In  General. 

84.  The  French  Ballet. 

85.  Cambert  and  Lully. 

86.  The  German  Singspiel. 

87.  The  Opera  in  Germany. 

88.  The  English  Masque. 

89.  Purcell. 

90.  Venetian  Opera-Writers  after 

1670. 

91.  The  Opera  at  Rome  and  Naples. 
Chap.  XII.  Progress  in  Church 

Music. 

92.  In  General. 

93.  The  Roman  School. 


94.  Venetian  Church  Composers. 

95.  In  Germany. 

96.  Schiitz  and  the  Oratorio  Style. 

97.  The  Bach  Family. 

98.  In  F ranee,  Spain  and  Portugal. 

99.  In  England. 

Chap.  XIII.  The  Organ  Style. 

100.  The  Rising  Importance  of  In- 

struments. 

101.  The  Keyboard. 

102.  The  Organ. 

103.  The  Rise  of  the  Organ  Style. 

104.  Italian  Organists. 

105.  The  South  German  School. 

106.  The  North  German  School. 

107.  The  Thuringian  School. 

108.  In  Western  Europe. 

Chap.  XIV.  The  Violin.  Musi- 
cal Literature. 

109.  Stringed  Instruments  in  Gen- 

eral. 

1 10.  The  Genesis  of  the  Violin, 
in.  The  Great  Violin-Makers. 

1 12.  Early  Violin  Music  and  Vio- 

linists. 

1 13.  Literature  about  Music. 

1 14.  Summary  of  the  Century. 


164 


CHAPTER  X 


THE  EARLY  MUSICAL  DRAMA 

74.  General  Survey.  — In  general  history  the  17th  century 
has  less  distinctive  character  than  the  16th,  being  a time  of  ex- 
tensive readjustments  in  politics,  society  and  thought  along 
lines  previously  indicated.  So,  although  the  actual  amount  of 
artistic  activity  was  great,  it  was  not  marked  by  the  most  dis- 
tinguished achievement,  except,  perhaps,  in  literature. 

In  Germany  the  devastating  Thirty  Years1  War  (1618-48)  almost  para- 
lyzed social  energy,  not  only  for  the  time,  but  long  afterward.  England 
was  racked  for  an  equal  time  by  the  struggles  between  the  Stuarts  and 
the  Puritans,  ending  in  1660  with  the  restoration  of  the  monarchy.  In 
France  the  great  feature  was  the  long  reign  of  the  autocratic,  ambitious 
and  luxurious  Louis  XIV.  (1643-1715),  in  which  took  place  the  lamen- 
table exodus  of  the  Huguenots  before  and  after  the  revocation  of  the  Edict 
of  Nantes  (1685).  Italy  was  comparatively  peaceful.  Striking  events 
were  a new  repulse  of  the  Turks  in  the  east,  the  reduction  of  the  Empire 
to  a merely  nominal  character,  the  rise  of  Sweden,  and  the  colonization 
of  America,  but  none  of  these  had  immediate  relation  to  musical  progress. 

In  the  musical  world  the  energy  already  developed  had  mo- 
mentum enough  to  proceed  in  spite  of  external  conditions. 
Early  in  the  century  the  most  notable  new  fact  is  the  rapid 
evolution  of  dramatic  music,  especially  the  opera,  which  was 
soon  propagated  from  Italy  into  Germany,  France  and  England 
with  interesting  results.  To  this  followed  the  vigorous  advance 
of  instrumental  music,  again  from  Italy  as  a centre.  Indeed, 
Italy  now  fully  replaces  the  Netherlands  as  the  musical  head- 
quarters of  Europe.  In  Germany,  however,  independent  genius 
is  displayed  in  sacred  music,  especially  for  the  organ,  and  in 
France  a special  aptitude  for  concerted  instrumental  writing. 
Musical  theory  continues  to  crystallize  towards  its  modern  form. 
The  manufacture  of  instruments  like  the  violin,  the  organ  and 
other  keyboard  instruments  is  perfected  or  decidedly  improved, 
so  that  music  of  a higher  order  is  demanded  and  scope  given 
for  instrumental  as  well  as  vocal  virtuosity.  Performance  now 

165 


66 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


becomes  differentiated  as  a significant  branch  of  musicianship, 
especially  on  the  vocal  side.  Correlative  with  this  is  the  ten- 
dency to  transfer  certain  forms  of  music  from  private  to  public 
patronage,  with  consequent  changes  in  the  standards  of  musical 
ambition  and  in  the  social  influence  of  the  art.  While  the 
century  presents  no  composer  of  the  first  order,  it  is  of 
great  interest  as  a preparation  for  the  creativeness  of  the  1 8th 
century. 

75.  The  Mediaeval  Plays.  — All  the  fine  arts  have  been  power- 
fully affected  sooner  or  later  by  the  universal  craving  for  dra- 
matic impression.  Dramaticness  is  a quality  in  art  not  easily 
defined.  It  usually  involves  features  or  arrangements  that  rep- 
resent or  suggest  a story,  with  personages,  action,  developing 
situations  and  a denouement  of  some  sort,  predestined  or  unex- 
pected. The  fascination  of  dramatic  art  in  all  forms  rests  upon 
the  fact  that  it  recalls  living  experiences,  continually  piques 
curiosity  as  to  the  outcome,  and  in  its  climaxes  is  sensationally 
exciting.  The  impulse  to  it  is  universal  in  all  ages. 

In  modern  society  the  drama  stands  as  a separate  and  independent 
fine  art.  But  it  is  not  always  remembered  that  other  fine  arts  are  con- 
stantly handled  dramatically,  even  the  static  arts  of  sculpture,  painting 
and  architecture,  and  of  course  the  mobile  arts  of  poetry  and  music  in  all 
their  larger  forms.  This  general  thesis  may  be  extensively  developed. 
It  is  here  mentioned  simply  to  justify  references  to  the  general  taste  for 
drama,  of  which  the  musical  drama  was  a result  and  by  which  at  first  it 
was  dominated. 

The  entire  modern  drama  — theatre  and  opera  — is  imme- 
diately descended  from  practices  in  the  Middle  Ages  that  were 
instituted  and  sustained  by  the  Church.  The  beginning  was 
doubtless  in  the  liturgy  itself  — the  Mass,  for  instance,  being  a 
sort  of  reenactment  of  the  sacrifice  of  Christ.  But  the  con- 
nection is  clearest  with  the  particular  undertakings  known  as 
Mysteries,  Miracle-Plays  and  Moralities,  all  of  which  were  origi- 
nally designed  to  give  religious  instruction  and  edification, 
though  from  the  first  tending  to  pass  over  into  secular  diver- 
sions. These  were  the  direct  precursors  of  the  opera  and 
the  oratorio,  even  though  originally  they  may  have  contained 
no  important  musical  features  whatever. 

The  Mystery  was  properly  a representation  of  some  Biblical  story.  Its 
development  was  most  natural  in  connection  with  the  stories  of  Easter, 


THE  MEDIAEVAL  PLAYS 


167 

including  all  the  events  from  the  Betrayal  to  the  Resurrection,  and  of 
Christmas ; but  it  was  early  extended  to  subjects  like  the  Creation,  the 
Flood,  the  Exodus,  the  lives  of  Biblical  characters,  and  the  Last  Judg- 
ment. The  words  were  taken  from  the  Bible  direct  as  far  as  possible. 
The  earlier  renderings  were  by  ecclesiastics  in  churches  or  monasteries. 
Gradually  these  expansions  of  church  services  became  protracted  per- 
formances, occupying  parts  of  several  days,  which  tended  more  and  more 
to  swing  away  from  the  Church.  The  common  tongue  replaced  the 
Latin,  liberties  were  taken  with  the  narratives,  and  by-play  of  a comic 
kind  was  slipped  in,  with  not  a little  superstition  as  well.  These 
features,  with  the  accent  upon  mere  amusement,  from  the  13th  century 
caused  the  form  to  be  less  approved  by  the  church  authorities,  so  that  it 
betook  itself  to  the  market-places  or  the  fields,  where  large  crowds  could 
gather  and  every  kind  of  topic  and  treatment  could  be  tolerated.  The 
further  development  of  these  public  plays  varied  in  different  countries. 
In  many  cases  their  maintenance  became  a municipal  function,  while  in 
others  they  were  undertaken  by  the  various  guilds  of  craftsmen.  As  a 
rule,  Mysteries  ceased  with  the  Reformation,  but  survivals  exist  even  now, 
as  the  Passion-Play  at  Oberammergau  in  Bavaria. 

The  Miracle-Play  was  an  offshoot  of  the  foregoing,  its  materials  being 
taken  from  the  legendary  lives  of  the  saints.  Its  tendency  was  to  em- 
phasize heroic,  romantic  or  magical  incidents,  often  with  great  freedom 
of  treatment.  Though  not  so  closely  liturgical  in  origin,  its  first  purpose 
was  ecclesiastical,  and  one  variety  of  it  consisted  in  elaborations  of  for- 
mulae like  the  Lord’s  Prayer  or  the  Creed.  It  passed  over  readily  into 
mythological  or  historical  dramas,  varying  widely  in  subject. 

The  Morality  was  an  allegory  in  which  qualities  or  other  abstract 
notions  were  personified.  It  was  properly  religious  or  moral,  but  oc- 
casionally assumed  didactic  forms  of  a more  general  sort.  Bunyan’s 
‘ Pilgrim's  Progress  ’ is  a well-known  literary  example  of  the  Morality  idea. 

In  all  these  the  staple  procedure  was  dialogue  between  the  personages, 
but  among  the  accessories  were  passages  for  narrators  (supplying  parts 
of  the  story),  comment-passages,  somewhat  after  the  fashion  of  the  ancient 
Greek  chorus  (often  arranged  for  the  audience  as  a participant  in  the 
action),  and  interludes  and  by-plays  of  all  kinds.  The  use  of  music 
became  frequent,  either  as  a vehicle  for  the  dialogue  or  as  a comment  or  in- 
terlude. In  such  cases  the  forms  used  were  either  borrowed  from  Plain- 
Song  or  folk-song,  or  prepared  in  similar  styles.  There  was  no  distinct 
recognition  of  the  peculiarly  dramatic  types  of  musical  writing  until  near 
the  end  of  the  16th  century.  There  was  little  real  scenery,  but  somewhat 
elaborate  stages  were  often  provided  — one  of  the  favorite  forms  being 
one  separated  into  stories,  heaven  above,  hell  beneath  and  earth  between. 
These  stages  were  often  mounted  on  wheels  and  drawn  from  place  to  place. 

By  the  16th  century,  then,  the  street-play  had  become  a common  institu- 
tion in  all  leading  countries,  and  was  well  on  its  way  toward  the  modern 
theatre.  The  differentiation  of  the  opera  began  when  it  was  perceived 
that  the  vehicle  of  impression  might  be  musical  throughout  and  when 
appropriate  musical  styles  were  devised. 


i68 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


It  should  be  added  that  back  of  the  mediaeval  drama,  much  of  whose 
history  is  illustrated  by  literary  remains,  especially  in  Teutonic  Europe, 
lay  multifarious  Byzantine  undertakings,  sometimes  within  the  Church, 
sometimes  in  hostility  to  it.  These  seem  to  have  represented  every 
type  and  quality,  from  the  classic  tragedy  or  comedy  down  to  the 
rudest  vaudeville.  Music  and  dancing  were  used  so  freely  that  certain 
works  were  at  least  virtually  operettas.  By  way  of  Constantinople, 
then,  a continuous  dramatic  tradition  and  practice  in  Greek  extended 
from  ancient  times  even  till  the  15th  century.  But  about  all  this,  as 
about  analogous  dramatic  traditions  in  Latin  here  and  there  in  the 
West,  the  available  data  are  meagre.  Apparently,  the  remarkable 
Byzantine  interest  in  the  drama  and  its  musical  accessories  had  no 
direct  connection  with  the  rise  of  Italian  opera,  for  Italy  was  slow  to 
adopt  the  culture  that  expressed  itself  in  the  Greek  language. 

76.  Musical  Experiments.  — While  the  use  of  music  in  some 
way  as  a dramatic  accessory  was  common  in  the  16th  century, 
a peculiar  interest  attaches  to  two  Italian  experiments.  One  of 
these  was  made  about  1560  by  the  Roman  priest  Neri,  who  em- 
ployed singing  in  popular  gatherings  for  instruction  in  Biblical 
topics,  and  the  other  from  about  1575  by  the  Florentine  dilettanti 
(see  sec.  70).  The  former  slightly  prefigured  the  oratorio,  while 
the  latter  pointed  clearly  toward  the  opera.  Both  of  these  lines 
of  progress  were  profoundly  influenced  by  the  prevailing  types 
of  dramatic  effort,  but  at  first  their  importance  lay  in  discover- 
ing strictly  musical  ways  and  means  for  dramatic  expression,  and 
in  bringing  poetic  styles  into  conjunction  with  musical  expression. 

Filippo  Neri  (d.  1595)  was  a zealous  Florentine  who  from  about  1550  was 
prominent  at  Rome  in  philanthropic  and  educational  work  conducted  at  the 
oratory  ( oratorio ) first  of  the  S.  Girolamo  monastery  and  later  of  Sta.  Maria 
in  Vallicella,  his  efforts  being  so  successful  as  to  lead  in  1564  to  the  formation 
of  a brotherhood  for  popular  instruction,  called  the  Congregation  of  the 
Oratory  (which  has  had  many  distinguished  members  in  Italy,  France  and 
England,  and  still  exists).  Singing  was  magnified  by  Neri  as  a help  in  his 
meetings,  and  from  1565  he  enlisted  the  services  of  G.  Animuccia  and  Pa- 
lestrina of  the  Papal  Chapel  in  the  preparation  of  laudi  spirituali  — plain 
settings  of  sacred  words,  to  be  sung  after  his  addresses.  From  this  practice 
came  later  the  name  ‘oratorio1  for  a sacred  musical  drama,  though  Neri's 
efforts  were  not  themselves  dramatic. 

We  know  little  of  the  details  of  the  first  Florentine  experiments,  because 
the  works  are  not  preserved.  Galilei  is  said  to  have  been  the  pioneer  with  a 
solo  scene  from  Dante’s  Inferno  and  some  settings  from  Lamentations.  Ca- 
valiere  followed  in  1588-95  with  works  on  classical  topics,  and  in  1594  Peri, 
perhaps  with  Caccini,  wrote  music  for  Rinuccini’s  Dafne , privately  given  at 
Corsi’s  house.  In  all  these  the  style  was  monodic,  probably  a crude  recitative. 


THE  FIRST  OPERAS  AND  ORATORIOS 


69 


In  1594  Orazio  Vecchi’s  Amfiparnasso  was  produced  at  Modena,  a comedy 
wholly  in  madrigal  style,  which  was  either  an  unconscious  demonstration 
of  the  ineptitude  of  that  style  for  dramatic  use  or  a satire  (this  work  is 
extant) . A similar  work  was  Banchieri’s  La  pazzia  senile,  given  in  1 598  at 
Venice. 

In  1600,  however,  for  the  marriage  of  Henry  IV.  and  Maria  de1  Medici  at 
Florence,  Rinuccini’s  poem  Euridice  was  set  to  music  independently  by  both 
Peri  and  Caccini,  the  performed  version  being  made  up  from  both  and  the  two 
at  once  published.  Peri’s  version  opens  with  a seven-stanza  prologue  in  re- 
citative style,  with  ritornelli.  The  dialogue  proceeds  in  recitative  with  brief 
interjected  choruses,  a long  passage  for  a triple  flute  and  a final  dance.  The  ac- 
companiment is  written  for  a gravicembalo  (harpsichord),  two  large  lutes  and 
a lira  grande  (large  viol),  with  only  bare  indications  of  the  chords  intended. 
Caccini’s  version  is  in  the  same  style,  except  that  he  writes  more  freely  for 
the  voices,  actually  indulging  in  florid  runs  or  fioriture.  These  works  mark 
the  beginning  of  the  musical  drama,  the  joint  production  being  usually 
called  ‘ the  first  opera.1  They  also,  like  their  many  successors,  illustrate 
the  combination  of  the  Mystery  with  stories  of  classical  mythology. 

In  1600,  also,  but  some  ten  months  earlier,  Cavaliere’s  Rappi'esentazione 
di  anitna  e di  corpo  had  been  produced  at  Rome,  apparently  as  one  of  a series 
of  sacred  musical  dramas  under  the  auspices  of  the  Oratorians,  all  the  others 
of  which  are  lost.  This  work  is  not  only  more  extended  than  the  above 
(some  90  sections),  but  technically  more  elaborate.  It  includes  recitatives, 
solos,  short  choruses,  an  instrumental  intermezzo,  part-song  movements,  etc., 
with  a final  chorus  in  two  alternative  forms,  one  in  four  parts  with  dancing 
and  the  other  contrapuntal.  The  sense  of  the  text  is  often  musically  expressed 
with  effectiveness  and  evidence  of  latent  power.  The  accompaniment  is  de- 
signed for  a gravicembalo,  a large  lute,  a double  lira  and  two  flutes,  with  a 
violin  suggested  to  strengthen  the  soprano  throughout.  Cavaliere  died  the 
year  before  his  work  was  given,  but  he  left  explicit  directions  that  show  his 
artistic  sense  of  dramatic  values.  This  is  often  called  ‘ the  first  oratorio,1 
though  its  adherence  to  the  Morality  type  was  not  at  all  characteristic  of  its 
successors  — and,  indeed,  no  successor  appeared  for  almost  a quarter-century 
(unless  possibly  Agazzari’s  small  pastoral  Eumelio , 1606,  is  to  be  assigned  to 
this  class). 

The  principles  of  dramatic  singing  embodied  in  the  above  works  were  set 
forth  by  Caccini  in  1601  in  the  preface  to  a book  of  accompanied  solos  called 
Le  nuove  musiche — a phrase  which  is  still  used  to  describe  the  many  features 
in  which  theory  and  praxis  about  1600  were  consciously  departing  from  the 
old  traditions.  The  general  thesis  of  Caccini’s  preface  is  that  singing  should  be 
guided  by  the  desire  to  bring  out  the  meaning  and  artistic  force  of  the  words. 
Emphasis  is  put  upon  vocal  execution  in  all  its  parts,  including  tone-formation, 
correct  intonation  and  enunciation,  the  use  of  the  three  principal  registers, 
text-interpretation,  freedom  of  delivery,  etc.  Embellishments  of  various  kinds 
are  carefully  explained  and  illustrated,  though  their  excessive  use  is  deprecated. 
Two  extended  examples  of  solos  are  appended  for  study.  The  whole  forms  a 
well-reasoned  guide  to  the  new  art  of  solo-singing,  and  shows  how  rapidly 
ideas  about  its  technique  had  matured. 


170 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


In  the  direct  Florentine  succession  was  the  setting,  in  1607,  by  Marco  da 
Gagliano  (d.  1642)  of  Rinuccini’s  Dafne , a work  cognate  in  style  with  those 
of  Peri  and  Caccini,  but  slightly  more  expanded. 

77.  Monteverdi.  — While  the  Florentine  enthusiasts  are  to  be 
honored  as  pioneers  in  the  New  Music,  their  efforts  might  not 
have  had  at  once  so  large  an  influence  if  a new  factor  in  the 
situation  had  not  been  introduced.  The  movement  presently 
lost  its  local  character  and  was  transferred  to  Venice,  where, 
through  the  genius  of  the  mature  and  experienced  musician 
Monteverdi  it  achieved  a success  that  brought  it  before  the 
whole  musical  world.  Part  of  this  was  due  to  the  readiness  of 
Monteverdi  to  cast  aside  whatever  was  not  serviceable  for  his  im- 
mediate dramatic  purpose,  and  part  to  the  peculiar  musical 
eminence  of  Venice.  His  series  of  dramas  (1607-42)  made  the 
opera  the  most  popular  form  of  composition  in  Italy  and  started 
an  interest  that  gradually  spread  everywhere.  He  stood  forth 
as  an  innovator  in  his  disregard  of  the  customary  conjunct 
voice-writing  so  far  as  dramatic  effect  demanded  sudden  and 
even  difficult  leaps,  in  his  vigorous  pushing  of  the  solo  beyond 
the  tame  and  timid  limits  of  the  early  recit  itive  to  at  least  the 
stage  of  the  arioso,  in  his  sense  of  the  value  of  a somewhat 
symmetrical  phrase-plan,  and  in  his  experiments  with  instru- 
mentation. Gradually  his  efforts  incited  imitation  and  further 
advance  by  other  composers.  They  also  led,  in  1637,  to  the 
establishment  in  Venice  of  the  first  opera-house  — the  begin- 
ning of  a long  line  elsewhere. 

Monteverdi’s  fame  spread  speedily  throughout  Europe,  and 
he  must  still  be  regarded  as  one  of  the  formative  geniuses  of 
musical  history.  This  fame  was  different  from  that  of  any  of 
his  great  predecessors.  They  were  invaluable  students  of  the 
structural  texture  of  composition  as  an  end  in  itself,  while  he 
brought  to  the  front  the  importance  of  so  adapting  musical  pro- 
cedure, even  by  revolutionary  changes,  to  the  utterance  and 
delineation  of  every  phase  of  warm  emotion  that  it  might  be- 
come a many-sided  rescript  of  life  in  all  its  intenser  aspects. 
The  old  polyphony  was  apt  for  certain  kinds  of  feeling  only. 
The  New  Music  now  became  at  least  the  promise  of  a voice  for 
many  more,  and  for  those  closest  to  the  popular  heart. 

Claudio  Monteverdi  (d.  1643)  was  born  of  humble  parents  at  Cremona  in 
1567,  early  showed  musical  aptitude,  studied  under  Ingegneri,  became  violist 


MONTEVERDI 


171 

to  the  Duke  of  Mantua  (where  he  was  choirmaster  from  1601),  and  began 
publishing  canzonets  and  madrigals  in  1583,  showing  sympathy  with  the 
newer  features  of  composition.  After  at  least  thirty  years1  experience  as 
player  and  composer,  and  after  great  success  in  1607-8  with  his  first  three 
dramatic  works,  in  1613  he  was  made  choirmaster  at  St.  Mark’s  in  Venice, 
where  he  remained  in  honor  till  his  death.  For  several  years  he  was  engrossed 
in  sacred  music,  though  continuing  secular  writing  in  small  forms,  but  re- 
turned to  the  opera  in  1627-30  and  again  in  1639-42  (after  the  opening  of  the 
first  opera-house).  Of  his  12  dramas  only  4 are  extant,  Orfeo  (160 7,  text  by 
Striggio),  II  ballo  deW  higrate  (1608,  dance-play,  text  by  Rinuccini),  II  ritorno 
d 1 Ulisse  (1641,  text  by  Badoar,  known  in  a form  perhaps  not  authentic),  and 
L incoronazione  di  Poppea  (1642,  text  by  Busenello).  Of  the  most  famous, 
Arianna  (1618,  text  by  Rinuccini),  only  a fragment  remains. 

Orfeo  marks  a great  advance  on  previous  experiments.  The  staple  form 
is  still  the  recitative,  but  it  is  more  declamatory,  with  passages  of  sustained 
melody  looking  toward  the  later  aria,  and  there  are  frequent  choruses  and 
instrumental  numbers,  a fanfare  prelude  and  many  ritornelli.  The  accompani- 
ments are  diversified,  including  hints  of  novel  effects  and  some  interesting  con- 
trasts between  groups  of  instruments,  but  the  parts  are  not  usually  written  out 
— simply  indicated  by  a figured  bass.  The  orchestra  was  extraordinary — 2 
harpsichords,  2 large  lutes,  2 violins,  10  tenors,  2 viole  di  gamba,  2 bass  viols, 
a double  harp,  3 trumpets,  2 cornets,  a clarion,  a small  flute  and  three  portative 
organs. 

In  the  later  works  special  effects  appeared  for  the  first  time,  like  the  tremo- 
lando  and  the  pizzicato,  and  in  the  last  there  are  dialogues,  duets  and  a trio, 
besides  many  solos,  but  no  chorus. 

At  the  outset  the  musical  drama  was  wholly  dependent  upon 
the  extravagance  of  wealthy  individuals,  and  was  strictly  private. 
With  the  establishment  of  opera-houses  it  became  a public 
amusement  and  a source  of  musical  education.  Thus  was  opened 
a new  field  for  singers  and  instrumentalists,  since  every  opera- 
house  made  up  its  company  afresh  at  intervals.  Thus,  too,  was 
called  into  being  a new  class  of  organizers,  the  managers  or  im- 
presarios, whose  business  it  was  to  cater  to  the  public  taste, 
especially  by  ‘ discovering  ’ new  works  or  performers.  The  de- 
velopment of  the  musical  drama  and  the  opera-house  business 
have  been  closely  interdependent  ever  since. 

The  first  Venetian  opera-house  (1637)  was  that  of  S.  Cassiano,  under 
the  management  of  Ferrari  and  Mannelli,  respectively  the  librettist  and 
the  composer  of  the  first  work  given.  Before  1700,  no  less  than  16  opera- 
houses  had  been  started  in  Venice,  half  of  them  before  1670.  Other 
cities  followed  much  more  slowly  — for  example,  Rome  had  but  3 in 
1700  (the  first  founded  in  1661),  while  Bologna  had  none  till  1680.  But 
operas  were  often  given  in  theatres,  so  that  the  institution  spread  more 
rapidly  than  its  edifices. 


72 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


Contemporaries  of  Monteverdi,  as  a rule  represented  each  by  but  one  work, 
were  (besides  Gagliano  noted  above)  Girolamo  Giacobbi  (d.  1630),  probably 
the  first  native  opera-writer  in  Bologna  (intermezzi,  1608,  operas,  1610,  '17)  ; 
Paolo  Quagliati  (d.  before  1623),  whose  play  was  produced  at  Rome  ( 1 61 1 ) 
from  a movable  stage;  Stefano  Landi  of  Rome.  (1619);  Filippo  Vitali,  a 
Florentine,  temporarily  in  Rome  (1620)  ; Francesca  Caccini,  the  talented 
daughter  of  Giulio  Caccini  of  Florence  (1625)  ; Domenico  Mazzocchi  (1626), 
Giacinto  Cornachioli  (1629),  Michel  Angelo  Rossi  (1635),  and  Loreto  Vittori 
( 1 639)  — the  last  four  all  of  Rome.  In  the  same  period  was  Schiitz,  the 
pioneer  in  Germany  ( Dafne , 1627,  and  a later  ballet,  1638). 

78.  The  Intermezzi.  — The  dramatic  fertility  of  the  age  was 
shown  not  simply  in  extended  and  serious  operas,  but  in  many 
entertaining  pieces  of  small  dimensions  and  often  humorous 
tone,  meant  to  be  performed  between  the  acts  of  literary  plays. 
Such  entr’actes  were  common  in  the  later  16th  century  in  the 
madrigal  or  dance  style,  and  were  called  ‘ intermedi  ’ or  ‘ inter- 
mezzi,’ sometimes  ‘ balletti  ’ when  dancing  predominated. 
After  1600  these  turned  steadily  from  the  older  contrapuntal 
style  to  monophonic  solos  and  dances,  usually  with  a slight  plot 
and  some  personages.  They  served  to  popularize  the  new  mo- 
nodic  style,  to  afford  composers  a chance  for  experiment,  and 
finally  to  lead  the  way  toward  the  opera  buffa  (see  sec.  126). 
The  Florentines  were  prompt  to  use  such  forms,  followed  soon 
by  others  in  northern  Italy,  who  were  not  ready  for  the  sustained 
effort  of  the  real  opera. 

Among  the  many  famous  instances  of  the  early  use  of  intermezzi  mention 
may  be  made  of  a comedy  by  Bardi  at  Florence  in  1589,  for  which  several 
intermezzi  were  prepared,  the  texts  mostly  by  Rinuccini,  the  music  by  Bardi 
himself,  Cavaliere,  Caccini,  Peri,  Marenzio  and  Cristofano  Malvezzi  (d.  1597). 
Adriano  Banchieri  (d.  1634),  the  organist  and  church  composer  of  Bosco,  Imola 
and  Bologna,  wrote  a number  of  works  of  this  class  (1603-28),  one  of  which 
(1607)  was  a pendent  in  the  new  style  to  his  La  pazzia  se7iile  (1598).  Gio- 
vanni Boschetto  Boschetti  brought  out  at  Viterbo  in  1616  his  Strali  d',a7nore, 
which  illustrates  not  only  the  rapid  advance  of  the  new  style  toward  question- 
ably sensuous  representations,  but  also  the  tendency  to  treat  intermezzi  as 
parts  of  a secondary  drama  in  spite  of  their  detached  use  in  the  pauses  of  an- 
other play.  A similar  example  is  a series  by  Ottavio  Vernizzi  in  1623  — the 
first  of  the  kind  in  Bologna.  From  this  time  intermezzi  were  certainly  as  numer- 
ous as  operas,  though  usually  far  less  important. 

79.  Cavalli,  Carissimi  and  Cesti.  — Among  perhaps  twenty- 
five  dramatic  composers  who  entered  the  field  before  1670,  three 
were  decidedly  the  most  influential  in  fixing  the  characteristic 


CAVALLI,  CARISSIMI  AND  CESTI 


173 


forms  to  be  used  in  both  opera  and  oratorio.  These  were  Ca- 
valli  of  Venice,  pupil  and  successor  of  Monteverdi,  Carissimi  of 
Rome,  who  devoted  himself  to  sacred  music,  and  Cesti  of  Flor- 
ence, Rome  and  Vienna,  a pupil  of  Carissimi,  but  as  an  opera- 
writer  chiefly  associated  with  Venice.  These  three,  though 
strict  contemporaries,  became  important  in  succession. 

Cavalli’s  special  service  lay  in  the  full  recognition  of  the  aria  as 
distinct  from  the  recitative.  The  latter  had  been  the  type  from 
which  more  flowing  or  declamatory  passages  had  been  developed 
without  evident  differentiation,  thus  retaining  the  literary  stand- 
point that  marked  the  first  experiments.  Cavalli  realized  that 
in  every  strong  dramatic  situation  room  should  also  be  made 
for  absolutely  lyric  expression  through  solo  song,  having  great 
musical  interest  and  value  in  itself.  This  was  the  true  aria, 
not  an  elaborate  variety  of  recitative,  but  a song  embedded  in 
the  action.  Cavalli  thus  brought  to  the  front  an  element  that 
before  long  came  to  dominate  the  opera  completely.  His  own 
arias  were  not  carried  much  beyond  folk-song  patterns,  though 
occasionally  they  suggest  the  da  capo  form  that  later  became 
the  rule.  At  first  he  also  clung  to  the  chorus,  but  gradually 
omitted  it  altogether.  Instead,  he  did  much  to  develop  the 
duet  or  dual  aria,  often  with  interesting  imitations  between  the 
voices. 

Carissimi,  while  pursuing  similar  lines  of  advance  in  the 
oratorio,  added  a valuable  appreciation  of  the  essential  powers 
of  the  voice  as  an  instrument,  and  led  the  way  more  positively 
toward  the  freedom  and  brilliance  of  effect  that  later  made  daz- 
zling vocalization  the  crowning  feature  of  the  opera.  He  was 
specially  able  in  what  came  to  be  known  as  the  ‘cantata’  — 
usually  a short  solo  work  in  which  variety  was  secured  by  skill- 
ful alternations  of  style,  but  also  sometimes  one  in  which  several 
voices  were  handled  characteristically  as  if  they  were  personages. 
He  was  important,  too,  for  attention  to  the  chorus  and  to  the 
harmonic  enrichment  of  accompaniments  (see  sec.  82). 

Cesti  went  beyond  these  in  the  technical  variety  and  vigor 
with  which  he  developed  what  they  had  begun.  His  power  of 
genuine  invention  was  more  conspicuous,  both  in  breadth  and  in 
abundance,  with  more  of  charming  and  vivacious  brilliance,  includ- 
ing much  of  the  comic  element.  He  transferred  to  the  opera 
all  that  Carissimi  had  wrought  out  in  the  cantata,  with  a better 


174 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


binding  of  the  movements  into  a balanced  whole,  and  advanced 
the  plan  of  scenes  and  acts  toward  its  later  completeness.  The 
chorus  he  used  sparingly,  but  with  ability.  His  accompani- 
ments and  instrumental  numbers  were  carefully  and  freshly  con- 
ceived, though  without  special  increase  in  orchestral  resources. 
In  mere  number  of  works  he  falls  much  behind  Cavalli,  but  he 
did  more  to  setvforth  the  opera  as  a permanent  type  of  musical 
art,  thus  rounding  out  the  first  stage  of  progress  that  had  been 
begun  by  the  Florentines  almost  a century  before. 

Francesco  Cavalli  (d.  1676)  was  born  at  Crema  about  1600,  and  was 
trained  at  Venice,  probably  under  Monteverdi.  His  real  name  was  Caletti- 
Bruni,  but  he  owed  his  education  to  a noble,  whose  name  he  took  in  return. 
His  whole  career  was  spent  at  St.  Mark’s,  as  singer  from  1617,  second  organ- 
ist from  1640,  first  from  1665,  and  choirmaster  from  1668.  He  married  into  a 
wealthy  family  and  enjoyed  much  esteem.  His  operas  numbered  about  40 
(1639-67),  two-thirds  of  them  crowded  into  the  years  1642-55.  Nearly  all 
were  first  given  at  Venice.  The  most  famous  was  Giasone  (1649),  which  was 
widely  reproduced  elsewhere,  but  only  one,  Xerse  (1654),  was  published.  In 
1660  he  was  called  to  Paris  to  assist  in  the  festivities  at  the  marriage  of  Louis 
XIV.,  giving  Xerse  (with  incidental  music  by  Lully),  and  again  in  1662,  giving 
Ercole  amante.  He  was  likewise  called  upon  to  grace  other  occasions,  as  to 
Milan  in  1653  and  to  Innsbruck  in  1662.  Besides  operas,  he  wrote  some 
church  music  (from  1645),  including  an  8-voice  Requiem. 

For  Carissimi,  see  sec.  82. 

Marc’  Antonio  Cesti  (d.  1669)  was  born  at  Florence  about  1620  and  studied 
with  Carissimi  at  Rome.  In  1646  he  became  ducal  choirmaster  at  Florence,  in 
1660  returned  to  Rome  as  tenor  in  the  Papal  Chapel,  and  from  1666  was  second 
choirmaster  of  the  Imperial  Chapel  at  Vienna,  dying  at  Venice  while  bringing 
out  his  last  opera,  Genserico  (finished  by  Partenio).  He  wrote  some  12 
operas  (from  1649,  all  but  two  after  1663).  One,  La  schiava  fortunata  ( 1667), 
was  written  jointly  with  P.  A.  Ziani,  and,  with  about  half  the  others,  was  first 
produced  at  Vienna,  the  rest  appearing  mostly  at  Venice.  The  most  noted 
were  La  Dori  (1663),  II pomo d' oro  (for  the  marriage  of  Leopold  I.  at  Vienna, 
1666),  and  the  comic  Le  disgrazie  d' amore  (1667),  while  the  initial  work, 
Orontea  (1649),  held  die  stage  at  Venice  till  1683.  He  left,  besides,  some  solo 
cantatas,  but  almost  no  church  music. 

80.  The  Early  Operas  as  Dramas. — The  first  blossoming  of 
the  opera  at  Venice  involved  more  than  the  opening  of  a new 
method  of  musical  expression.  It  fixed  a type  of  musical  drama 
that  for  almost  two  centuries  was  extremely  popular,  and  hence 
determinative  of  all  progress  in  secular  music.  A special 
word  should  therefore  be  said  about  the  dramatic  treatment 
adopted. 


THE  EARLY  OPERAS  AS  DRAMAS 


175 


While  the  early  opera  derived  its  topics  and  material  from  the 
ancient  drama  and  its  form  from  the  mediaeval  Mystery,  it  early 
settled  into  an  arbitrary  style  of  its  own.  The  stories  were  at 
first  wholly  taken  from  Greek  mythology,  but  tales  from  Roman, 
Jewish,  Oriental  or  early  Christian  history  were  soon  added, 
especially  those  that  had  already  been  used  by  Italian  poets. 
The  same  subjects  and  the  same  plots  constantly  recurred  with 
slight  variations.  Intrigues,  entanglements  through  disguises 
and  tricks,  applications  of  magical  or  superhuman  power,  and 
the  like,  abounded.  The  denouement  was  always  happy,  how- 
ever tragic  the  story,  while  absolute  comedy  became  more  and 
more  frequent.  Personages  were  usually  multiplied,  both  as 
actual  participants  and  as  a dumb  spectacle.  The  action  was 
divided  into  three  or  more  acts,  each  containing  many  scenes 
with  shifts  of  setting,  while  at  the  beginning  was  usually  a con- 
siderable prologue  by  mythological  characters  or  personified 
ideas  and  at  the  end  a licenza  or  epilogue  of  a dedicatory  or 
apologetic  nature.  Occasionally,  poets  of  ability  served  as  li- 
brettists (Busenello  being  named  as  the  most  gifted),  but,  as  a 
rule,  the  texts  were  hack-work,  often  hasty,  ill-conceived  and 
bombastic.  Especially  where  works  were  given  as  parts  of  lav- 
ish private  festivities,  but  more  or  less  in  all  cases,  the  expen- 
diture for  costumes,  scenery  and  manifold  accessories  tended  to 
be  enormous.  Great  numbers  of  soldiers,  slaves,  citizens,  etc., 
were  introduced  for  spectacular  effect,  with  quantities  of  animals, 
birds,  plants  and  other  natural  objects.  Huge  or  grotesque 
machines  or  figures  were  devised  to  heighten  the  illusions. 

As  an  illustration,  at  the  performance  of  Cesti’s  II  pomo  d' oro  at 
Vienna  (1666)  a special  theatre,  seating  1500  persons,  was  built  in  the 
castle  courtyard,  the  scenery  included  landscapes  and  a harbor  view,  the 
open  sea  with  tritons,  the  nether  world,  and  the  Olympian  heaven,  each 
with  its  respective  divinities,  and  the  number  of  characters  was  bewilder- 
ing. In  the  prologue  appeared  the  personified  divisions  of  the  Empire, 
Spain,  Austria,  Hungary,  Bohemia,  Germany,  Italy  — even  America! 
There  were  5 acts  and  67  scenes.  The  cost  of  production  was  said  to  be 
100,000  thalers.  Freschi’s  Berenice  at  Padua  (1680)  was  another  example 
of  prodigious  display. 

As  a rule,  the  opera  season  was  limited  to  the  time  of  Carnival 
(Epiphany  to  Lent),  but  supplemental  seasons  after  Easter  and 
in  the  autumn  were  sometimes  undertaken.  Novelties  were  con- 


;6 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


stantly  demanded  — which  explains  the  immense  number  of  works 
written  and  emphasizes  the  cases  in  which  certain  of  them  were 
given  more  than  once. 

The  difficulties  with  scenery  necessitated  long  waits  between 
acts  or  scenes,  to  offset  which  the  intermezzo  or  the  ballet  was 
a relief  — the  former  tending  to  be  a second  play  within  the 
main  one,  and  the  latter  becoming  ultimately  a somewhat  per- 
manent addition  to  the  spectacle  as  a whole. 

Until  about  1675  the  orchestra  was  usually  rather  meagre,  but  brief 
preludes,  ritornelli  and  independent  numbers  in  the  midst  of  the  action 
steadily  increased  in  importance,  necessitating  a gradual  expansion  of  the 
forces.  This  had  a decided  influence  upon  the  entire  development  of  in- 
strumental music  (see  sec.  112). 

81.  The  Earlier  Venetian  Opera-Writers.  — During  the  sixty 
years  from  1637  to  1700  an  extraordinary  number  of  operas 
appeared  in  Italy  — at  least  700.  When  the  list  is  analyzed,  it 
appears  that  about  1670  a decided  expansion  took  place, 
due  to  the  rise  of  independent  interest  at  Bologna  and  Na- 
ples, and  to  the  fertility  of  certain  writers.  Prior  to  1670  the 
new  works  averaged  four  or  five  per  year,  but  later  at  least 
three  times  as  many.  Till  long  after  1700  Venice  kept  far 
ahead  of  all  other  cities  in  the  number  of  first  productions,  and 
the  Venetian  style  dominated  everywhere.  The  most  important 
name,  after  those  mentioned,  is  that  of  Legrenzi. 

In  this  first  period  important  writers  were  the  following : — 

Francesco  Mannelli,  Ferrari’s  associate  in  the  first  opera-house,  where  his 
Andro?neda  (163 7)  was  the  first  work,  presented  6 others  (till  1666)  at  Venice, 
Florence,  Piacenza  and  Ferrara. 

Benedetto  Ferrari  (d.  1681),  born  in  1597  and  probably  trained  at  Rome, 
was  early  famous  as  a theorbist  and  later  as  a poet  (dramatic  works,  1644), 
being  the  librettist  of  Mannelli’s  first  two  operas  and  all  of  his  own.  After  a 
short  term  at  Vienna,  he  spent  most  of  his  life  in  court  service  at  Modena. 
His  8 operas  or  lesser  dramas  were  mostly  given  at  Venice  (1639-64),  and 
the  earlier  ones  were  repeated  at  various  places. 

Paolo  Sacrati  (d.  1650),  born  at  Parma,  probably  lived  at  Venice,  but  was 
finally  choirmaster  at  Modena.  To  his  credit  are  7 operas,  all  at  Venice 
(1639-48).  The  most  famous  was  the  comedy  La  Jinta  fiazza  (1641),  re- 
peated under  his  direction  at  Paris  (1645)  at  die  request  of  the  Premier 
Mazarin. 

Andrea  Mattioli,  from  1646  choirmaster  at  Imola,  from  1653  at  Ferrara,  and 
later  at  Mantua  till  at  least  1671,  produced  7 operas  (1650-66),  mostly  at 
Ferrara,  and  also  issued  collections  of  church  music  (from  1639). 


THE  VENETIAN  OPERA  BEFORE  1670 


1 77 

Antonio  Sartorio  (d.  1681),  born  at  Venice,  was  long  at  the  court  of  Bruns- 
wick, but  from  1676  was  second  choirmaster  at  St.  Mark’s.  He  brought  out 
14  operas  at  Venice  (from  1652,  mostly  from  1666),  besides  psalms  (1680). 

Pietro  Andrea  Ziani  (d.  1711),  born  at  Venice,  from  1657  choirmaster  at 
Bergamo,  from  1669  organist  at  St.  Mark’s,  and  from  1676  at  Naples,  was 
more  prolific,  producing  over  20  operas  (from  1657),  mostly  at  Venice,  besides 
2 oratorios,  church  works  (1640-60)  and  instrumental  pieces  (1691).  With 
him  the  growing  interest  in  instrumental  writing  becomes  notable  in  connec- 
tion with  the  opera. 

Giovanni  Legrenzi  (d.  1690)  was  born  near  Bergamo  about  1625  and  studied 
with  Rovetta  and  C.  Pallavicini.  From  1654  he  was  organist  at  Bergamo,  in 
1657-64  (if  not  longer)  choirmaster  at  Ferrara,  from  1672  head  of  one  of  the 
Venetian  conservatories,  from  1681  also  second  choirmaster  at  St.  Mark’s,  and 
chief  from  1685.  His  18  operas  (from  1664,  mostly  1675-84)  were  nearly  all 
produced  at  Venice.  He  was  highly  extolled  in  his  own  time,  and  is  conspicu- 
ous for  a decided  development  of  the  orchestral  accompaniments  and  for  suc- 
cessful handling  of  comic  scenes  and  plots.  He  was  also  eminent  for  many 
sacred  and  instrumental  works  (see  sec.  94).  With  him  begins  the  transition 
to  the  fertility  of  the  last  part  of  the  century.  His  distinguished  pupils  were 
many,  including  Lotti  and  Caldara. 

To  these  maybe  added  at  Venice  Giovanni  Rovetta  (d.  1668),  Monteverdi's 
successor  at  St.  Mark’s  in  1643  and  a distinguished  church  composer,  with  2 
operas  (1645-9)  5 Giambattista  Volpe  (d.  1692),  his  nephew  and  pupil  (hence 
called  Rovettino),  from  1665  organist  at  St.  Mark’s,  with  3 (1659-64) ; Carlo 
Grossi,  a conceited  singer  at  St.  Mark’s,  with  at  least  6 (1659-77),  besides 
church  works ; and  Giovanni  Antonio  Boretti  of  Parma,  with  at  least  8 
(1662-73). 

Outside  of  Venice  before  1670  may  be  noted,  at  Rome,  Luigi  Rossi,  one  of 
the  many  proteges  of  the  Cardinals  Barberini,  with  1 (1642),  besides  another 
at  Paris  (1647),  Marco  Marazzoli  (d.  1662),  a famous  harpist  and  from  1637  in 
the  Papal  Chapel,  with  3 (1642-58),  A.  M.  Abbatini  (d.  1677),  with  2 at 
Rome  and  Vienna  (1650-66),  and  P.  F.  Valentini  (d.  1654),  with  2 favole,  each 
with  intermezzi  (1654),  besides  learned  canons,  etc.;  at  Genoa,  Francesco 
Righi,  with  1 (1653)  ; at  Ferrara  and  Vienna,  Giuseffo  Tricarico,  with  2 
(1655-62);  at  Naples,  Francesco  Cirillo,  with  2 (1654-5);  at  Viterbo, 
Giovanni  Battista  Mariani  (1659)  ; and  at  Palermo,  Vincenzo  Amati  (1664). 

82.  The  Early  Oratorio.  — Although  the  musical  drama  began 
in  both  secular  and  sacred  varieties,  the  Venetian  attention  to 
the  former  left  the  latter  undeveloped.  The  one  Italian 
oratorio-composer  to  be  emphasized  is  Carissimi.  Before  his 
time  the  difference  between  the  two  forms  (so  far  as  both  were 
attempted)  lay  only  in  topic  and  text,  both  being  given  with 
scenery,  costume  and  action,  and  with  the  same  musical  materials. 
Carissimi  set  aside  the  theatrical  presentation,  often  committed 
dramatic  details  to  a ‘ Narrator,’  emphasized  the  function  of  the 

N 


I7« 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


chorus,  and  fully  recognized  the  value  of  a distinct  oratorio 
manner.  His  own  oratorios  were  short,  but  are  still  decidedly 
interesting.  He  also,  as  has  been  noted,  developed  the  cantata 
— a work  utilizing  the  dramatic  forms  of  recitative  and  aria, 
with  a more  or  less  dramatic  plan,  but  designed  either  for  a 
single  voice  or  for  a few  voices,  and  available  for  use  in  actual 
church  services,  often  with  organ  accompaniment. 

Giacomo  Carissimi  (d.  1674),  born  near  Rome  about  1604  and  probably 
trained  there,  was  from  1624  choirmaster  at  Assisi  and  from  1628  at  S. 
Apollinare  in  Rome,  remaining  till  his  death.  His  oratorios  number  15  or 
more,  the  most  famous  being  Jephta  and  Jonas  (dates  unknown).  His 
church  music  includes  many  motets  and  some  masses  (one  for  12  voices  on 
the  old  melody  Ly  online  anne , said  to  be  the  last  written  on  that  hackneyed 
‘subject’).  He  left  many  cantatas,  together  with  some  secular  and  half- 
humorous  pieces,  with  a treatise  on  singing  (known  only  in  German,  3d  ed. 
1689).  His  contributions  to  the  monodic  style  have  already  been  mentioned. 
As  a contrapuntist  he  was  notable,  not  as  a follower  of  Palestrina,  but  for  the 
accommodation  of  the  old  facility  to  the  new  conceptions  of  tonality.  He  is 
commonly  reckoned  as  next  to  Monteverdi  in  importance  in  the  century. 

Carissimi  stands  almost  alone  in  his  adherence  to  Biblical  subjects  in 
his  oratorios  — the  Flood,  Abraham  and  Isaac,  Jephtha,  the  Judgment  of 
Solomon,  Ezechiel,  Job,  Jonah,  Daniel,  Belshazzar,  the  Last  Judgment,  the 
Joy  of  the  Blessed.  Among  other  oratorios  up  to  1670,  only  a few  are 
strictly  Biblical,  while  several  celebrate  the  life  of  some  saint  (especially 
Loyola),  and  some  are  moralities  or  similar  works. 

The  meagre  list  of  Italian  oratorio-writers  in  the  early  period  includes 
Johannes  Hieronymus  Kapsberger  (d.  1650  ?),  a pretentious  German  the- 
orbist  who  pushed  himself  into  church  circles  at  Rome,  writing  2 oratorios 
(c.  1630),  an  opera,  madrigals,  solo  works  and  several  lute-books  (from  1604) ; 
Domenico  Mazzocchi,  a Roman  lawyer,  the  first  to  mention  the  signs  for 
crescendo  and  diminuendo,  with  2 oratorios  (1631)  ; Stefano  Landi  (1634)  ; 
Luigi  Rossi,  an  early  Roman  writer  of  cantatas;  Loreto  Vittori  (d.  1670)  of 
the  Papal  Chapel  (1647),  besides  cantatas;  Francesco  Bazzini  (d.  1660), 
a noted  theorbist  of  Bergamo  (c.  1650);  Marco  Marazzoli  (d.  1662),  one  at 
Rome  (1658),  besides  others  in  MS.;  Giovanni  Antonio  Boretti  of  Parma; 
Giuseffo  Tricarico  at  Vienna  (1661)  ; P.  A.  Ziani  (d.  1711)  of  Bergamo,  later 
at  Vienna,  with  2 (1662)  ; Giovanni  Antonio  Manara  of  Bologna,  with  3 (1665- 
85)  ; and  Maurizio  Cruciati,  also  of  Bologna  (1667). 

It  will  be  noted  that  what  interest  existed  was  chiefly  at  Rome. 

As  the  century  went  on,  attention  to  the  oratorio  continued 
in  Italy  to  a considerable  extent,  but  the  early  types  persisted 
without  special  improvement,  though  the  use  of  Biblical  sub- 
jects increased.  As  compared  with  the  genius  for  oratorio- 
writing that  presently  developed  in  Germany,  the  Italian 


THE  EARLY  ORATORIO 


179 


composers  in  this  form  from  the  first  displayed  but  moderate 
zeal  and  power,  and  the  public  interest  in  it  was  slight.  Yet 
the  total  number  of  works  produced  was  not  small. 

After  about  1660,  passing  over  those  with  but  one  or  two  works,  the  fol- 
lowing oratorio-composers  may  be  noted  : Provenzale  of  Naples,  with  3 (from 
c.  1670);  Colonna  (d.  1695)  of  Bologna,  with  11  (from  1677)  ; Stradella 
(d.  1681),  with  perhaps  8 (c.  1680),  of  which  S.  Giovanni  Battista  is  the 
best-known;  A.  Scarlatti  (d.  1725),  the  great  Neapolitan,  with  14  (from 
1683);  Pasquini  (d.  1710),  the  organist  of  Rome,  with  5 (1685-9);  Perti 
of  Bologna  (d.  1756),  with  over  10  (from  1685)  ; Gianettini  (d.  1721) 
of  Modena,  with  4 (1687-1704)  ; G.  B.  Bononcini  (d.  c.  1750)  of  Bologna, 
Vienna,  London,  etc.,  with  4 (from  1688)  ; Bassani  (d.  1716)  of  Ferrara,  with 
3 (c.  1689);  Aldrovandini  (d.  after  1 71 1 ) of  Bologna  and  Mantua,  with  5 
(1691-1706);  Pistocchi,  the  eminent  singing-master  of  Bologna,  with  3 
(from  1692);  and  Polaroli  (d.  1722)  of  Venice  and  Vienna,  with  at  least  3 
(from  c.  1700). 

At  Vienna,  Italian  workers  in  this  field  included  Bertali  (d.  1669),  with  3 
(1663-5);  Sances  (d.  1679),  with  4 (1666-72);  Draghi  (d.  1700),  the 
prolific  opera-writer,  with  over  30  (from  1669);  Ariosti  (d.  c.  1740),  with  5 
(1693-1709)  ; Badia  (d.  1738),  with  16  (1694-1717)  ; M.  A.  Ziani  (d.  1715), 
with  10  (1700-13)  ; and  M.  A.  Bononcini  (d.  1726),  with  3 (1707-11). 

Most  of  these  were  chiefly  famous  as  opera-writers  (see  secs.  90-91). 


CHAPTER  XI 


THE  EXPANSION  OF  DRAMATIC  MUSIC 

83.  In  General.  — Although  the  rise  of  the  Italian  opera  under 
Monteverdi,  Cavalli,  Carissimi  and  Cesti  has  unique  historic 
importance,  the  story  of  the  early  opera  was  by  no  means  con- 
fined to  Italy.  Italian  musicians  visited  other  countries  or  mi- 
grated to  them,  carrying  with  them  the  styles  to  which  they 
were  wonted.  The  Italian  opera  thus  came  into  contact  with 
native  styles  of  drama  that  were  on  the  verge  of  a definite 
musical  development  and  that  needed  only  a slight  impulse  to 
advance  to  national  types.  The  Italian  dramma  per  musica>  with 
its  accent  on  grandiose  recitative,  was  but  one  of  several  forms 
that  were  capable  either  of  independent  evolution  or  of  varied 
combination.  Prominent  among  these  were  the  French  ballet, 
the  German  singspiel  and  the  English  masque  — all  secular 
derivatives  in  some  way  of  the  mediaeval  Mysteries  and  Miracle- 
Plays,  but  with  differences  of  traditional  treatment.  With  these 
the  Italian  opera  either  competed  or  coalesced,  and  out  of  their 
varied  interactions  were  gradually  shaped  the  types  of  opera 
found  in  the  18th  century.  The  age  was  eager  to  adopt  or 
create  the  musical  drama  in  any  available  form.  The  strong 
influence  upon  musical  progress  of  the  later  opera  is  clearly 
due  to  the  intricate  blending  of  several  tendencies  that  first 
attracted  attention  in  the  17th  century.  While  the  works  pro- 
duced were  presently  overshadowed  by  later  ones,  the  interest 
of  the  lines  of  experiment  then  initiated  is  unquestionable. 

84.  The  French  Ballet.  — The  distinctive  feature  of  the  ballet 
as  a dramatic  form  (to  which  it  owes  its  name)  was  its  emphasis 
upon  actual  dancing  and  upon  the  kinds  of  structure,  action, 
verse  and  song  that  dancing  favored.  From  at  least  the  14th 
century  the  trend  of  French  taste  in  this  direction  had  been 
manifest.  It  showed  itself  in  a liking  for  pantomimic  spectacles, 
in  which  situations  and  events  were  illustrated  by  dance-en- 
sembles, for  dialogue  cast  in  the  form  of  reciprocal  verses  that 

180 


THE  FRENCH  BALLET 


1 8 1 


could  be  sung  to  dance-steps,  and  for  a general  shaping  of  words 
and  music  by  the  neat  and  exact  form  of  dance-patterns. 

The  reaction  of  all  this  upon  musical  method  was  decided. 
The  French  mind  was  not  content  with  the  more  or  less  form- 
less Italian  recitative  or  any  treatment  of  the  arioso  not  dis- 
tinctly rhythmic  — that  was  not  a clear  ‘tune.’  It  tended  at 
first  to  exalt  piquancy  of  tonal  effect  above  truth  to  the  text. 

While  not  avoiding  serious  themes,  it  frankly  sought  to  devise 
captivating  entertainments  rather  than  to  evolve  a grand  form 
of  monumental  art.  Ere  long  it  seized  eagerly  upon  instru- 
ments as  specially  effective  means  for  the  decoration  and  elabo- 
ration of  dance-themes  of  all  kinds.  Thus  was  early  laid  the 
foundation  of  that  sprightly  and  brilliant  type  of  composition 
that  has  always  been  characteristic  of  the  French  opera — a 
type  of  great  utility  to  musical  progress  even  when  its  works 
were  not  of  the  highest  intrinsic  value. 

The  evolution  of  the  French  drama  is  traceable  with  exceptional  com- 
pleteness. Only  a few  points  need  here  be  mentioned.  The  Trouvere 
play,  Robin  et  Alar  ion  (1285),  was  peculiar  because  wholly  devoid  of  re- 
ligious elements,  these  being  replaced  by  the  secular  features  of  amusing 
story,  light  song  and  dancing.  It  is  suspected  that  there  were  other  simi- 
lar works,  now  lost.  For  over  two  centuries  afterwards  the  performances 
of  Mysteries  and  Miracle-Plays  were  common  and  ambitious  in  various 
French  towns,  usually  under  the  care  of  societies  like  the  Confrerie  de  la 
Passion,  Les  Clercs  de  la  Bazoche,  Les  Enfants  sans  Souci,  etc.,  in  whose 
hands  the  free  use  of  music  and  dancing  increased. 

The  ‘mascarade1  or  mimetic  ballet  was  not  a French  invention,  but 
after  1500  it  became  specially  associated  with  French  court  festivities,  and 
in  some  form  has  remained  peculiarly  characteristic  of  the  French  drama. 
Though  what  is  now  called  the  ballet  has  fallen  to  the  low  estate  of  a mere 
divertissement  in  the  grand  opera  or  been  transformed  into  the  orchestic 
farce,  its  historic  prototype  was  significant  as  a dramatic  form  that  might 
have  been  the  forerunner  of  the  modern  opera  had  circumstances  favored 
it.  The  notable  performance  in  1581  of  the  Ballet  comique  de  la  reine 
(properly  Circe  et  ses  nymphes')  was  almost  as  early  as  any  like  undertak- 
ing in  Italy  and  much  more  pretentious.  Its  scenic  scale  is  shown  by  its 
expense  — over  3,600,000  francs.  Its  arranger,  though  not  the  composer 
of  its  incidental  music,  was  the  Italian  violist  Baltazarini.  Its  music  re- 
sembled that  of  the  Italian  madrigal-plays  in  that  it  did  not  include  solos. 
The  popularity  of  the  form,  especially  because  of  its  unlimited  spectacular 
possibilities,  is  evidenced  by  the  record  that  under  Henry  IV.  (1589-1610) 
about  80  ballets  were  produced  at  court.  If  some  constructive  genius  had 
appeared,  this  early  ballet  might  have  become  the  progenitor  of  the  opera 
proper.  As  it  was,  progress  paused  for  almost  a century. 


182 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


A few  attempts  were  made  to  import  musical  plays  from  Italy,  as 
Sacrati’s  La  fi?ita  pazza  (1645),  Rossi’s  Orfeo  (1647)  and  Cavalli’s  Xerse 
and  Ercole  amante  (1660-2),  and  French  imitations  seem  to  have  been 
attempted  in  1646-7.  But,  though  French  taste  for  theatric  spectacles 
had  long  been  supported  by  players  and  managers  from  Italy,  the  Italian 
musical  drama  commanded  but  scant  applause. 

Meanwhile,  the  ballet  advanced  from  its  early  miscellaneous  plan  to  a 
more  sustained  unity.  In  this  the  literary  leader  was  Isaac  de  Benserade 
(d.  1691),  the  court-poet,  whose  first  work  was  given  in  1651.  But  the 
progressive  musical  workers  were  Italians.  Detached  solo  songs  and 
part-songs  began  to  be  put  forth  in  1661  by  Michel  Lambert  (d.  1696) 
the  first  important  French  singing-master,  father-in-law  of  Lully. 

85.  Cambert  and  Lully.  — Opera  in  French  and  according  to 
French  ideas  took  shape  in  the  hands  of  the  mediocre  poet 
Perrin  and  the  composer  Cambert,  the  former  of  whom  supplied 
much  of  the  constructive  impulse,  while  the  latter  was  the  ex- 
ecutive genius.  Their  first  joint  experiment  in  1659  was  not 
followed  up  till  1671,  when  a more  pretentious  work  was  given 
in  the  first  public  opera-house  in  Paris. 

Notable  features  in  the  plan  adopted  were  these  : an  overture  in  three 
movements,  the  first  and  last  slow  and  sonorous,  the  second  quick  and 
fugal ; a grandiose  and  irrelevant  prologue  ; a loose  and  rather  miscellane- 
ous plot  on  a subject  from  Greek  mythology,  with  more  attention  to 
scenic  display  than  to  musical  coherence  or  dramatic  power ; a constant 
tendency  to  handle  the  recitative  and  arioso  with  emphasis  on  the  de- 
clamatory possibilities  of  the  text ; and  a marked  readiness  to  suspend 
the  action  for  ensembles  of  the  ballet  class.  Whether  Perrin  or  Cambert 
originated  any  of  these  features  is  doubtful.  It  is  more  likely  that  they 
were  features  to  which  French  taste  was  already  committed. 

At  this  point  appeared  the  Italian  Lully,  whose  cleverness, 
versatility  and  instinct  for  popularity  presently  made  him  the 
leading  figure.  Securing  the  royal  favor  and  a monopoly  of 
opera-production  and  occupying  a new  opera-house  (built  in 
1672),  he  put  forth  a surprising  series  of  works,  both  ballets  and 
real  operas,  which  united  the  Italian  and  the  French  styles  so 
successfully  as  to  establish  the  opera  in  Parisian  regard,  with 
himself  as  its  chief  and  almost  only  exponent.  Without  being 
a genius  of  a high  order,  Lully  was  certainly  talented  on  the 
dramatic  side,  with  a keen  sense  of  the  values  of  musical  means. 
At  the  same  time  when  the  Italian  opera  was  already  tending 
to  develop  the  music  at  the  expense  of  the  drama,  he  exalted 
the  forcible  delivery  of  the  words,  even  when  he  thus  missed 


CAMBERT  AND  LULLY 


183 


the  richer  and  more  affecting  uses  of  melody,  especially  as 
characterizing  personages  or  sentiments.  This  improved  the 
technique  of  the  recitative  and  restrained  the  drift  toward 
merely  pretty  tunes.  He  sought  to  captivate  by  ingenious  en- 
semble climaxes,  by  using  dances  freely,  and  by  a novel  amount 
of  instrumental  numbers.  He  did  much  to  unfold  the  latent 
possibilities  of  the  overture,  incidentally  advancing  the  capacity 
of  the  operatic  orchestra.  As  a composer,  he  often  showed 
power  in  stately  and  noble  effects,  and  not  a little  ingenuity  in 
devising  fresh  accompaniments.  In  practical  success  with  the 
public  he  far  outshone  all  his  contemporaries  and  immediate 
successors,  remaining  a dominant  influence  for  many  decades. 

Pierre  Perrin  (d.  1675),  born  in  Lyons,  came  to  Paris  about  1645,  was  a 
dependent  of  the  Duke  of  Orleans,  was  involved  in  many  difficulties  and  spent 
some  time  in  prison,  published  poems,  wrote  several  librettos  that  Cambert  set 
to  music,  and  died  in  poverty.  He  was  a clever  dancer  and  singer,  with  some 
musical  ability. 

Robert  Cambert  (d.  1677),  bom  at  Paris  in  1628,  was  a pupil  of  the  court- 
clavichordist  Chambonnieres,  served  as  organist  at  St.  Honore,  and  in  1665 
became  musician  to  the  Queen  Dowager.  Besides  writing  various  detached 
pieces,  including  motets,  songs  and  preludes,  he  joined  Perrin  in  some  operatic 
works,  first  in  1659-61  {La  pastorale,  Ariane,  Adonis),  and  again,  after  Perrin 
in  1669  had  secured  an  opera-monopoly  and  the  first  public  opera-house 
had  been  built,  in  1671  {Pomone,  Les  peines  et  piaisirs  de  V amour).  In  1672 
Lully  wrested  the  monopoly  from  Perrin,  and  Cambert  betook  himself  to 
London,  where  he  died  in  some  court  position.  Only  fragments  of  his  works 
have  survived,  but  these  show  him  as  a correct  and  careful  writer  for  the  time. 

Jean  Baptiste  Lully  (d.  1687)  was  born  in  Florence  in  1633,  probably  of 
noble  parents.  He  was  taught  the  violin  and  lute  as  a child.  Catching  the  notice 
of  the  Duke  of  Guise,  he  was  taken  to  Paris  and  installed  in  the  household  of 
Mile,  de  Montpensier,  at  first  as  a kitchen-boy.  His  musical  talent  soon  led 
to  his  advancement,  finally  into  the  private  band  of  Louis  XIV.,  of  both 
divisions  of  which  he  became  leader,  raising  the  whole  establishment  to  high 
efficiency.  From  1653  he  was  court-composer,  becoming  through  his  ballets 
one  of  the  king’s  chief  favorites.  In  1672  he  secured  the  exclusive  privilege 
held  by  Perrin,  and,  in  a new  theatre  specially  built,  began  the  series  of  about 
15  operas  by  which  his  fame  was  made.  In  1681  he  became  court-secretary 
and  was  ennobled.  His  death  was  occasioned  by  a blow  upon  the  foot  from 
his  cane  or  baton  while  conducting  a rehearsal.  In  character  he  presents  a 
curious  mixture  of  unquestionable  ability  and  mere  dexterity  as  a courtier.  He 
was  indefatigable,  excitable,  imperious,  proud  and  unscrupulous,  but  he  had 
such  gifts  as  player,  composer,  organizer  and  director  that  he  is  called  the 
founder  of  the  French  opera.  His  leading  operas  were  Alceste  (1674),  Isis 
(1677),  Per  see  (1682)  and  Armide  (1686).  The  success  of  some  of  them  was 
due  to  the  skillful  librettos  of  Quinault  (d.  1688).  From  1658  he  wrote  over 


184 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


30  ballets  and  similar  works,  some  to  texts  by  distinguished  poets,  like 
Moliere.  He  also  composed  some  church  music  and  many  violin-solos  and 
pieces  for  instruments.  He  is  sometimes  named  the  inventor  of  the  minuet, 
and  his  place  in  the  history  of  orchestral  music  is  almost  as  important  as  in 
that  of  the  opera  proper.  All  of  his  three  sons  were  musically  gifted. 

Although  Lully’s  vogue  long  prevented  the  success  of  others,  several  names 
should  be  mentioned  : — 

Marc  Antoine  Charpentier  (d.  1704),  born  at  Paris  in  1634,  went  to  Italy  to 
study  painting,  but  became  a pupil  of  Carissimi  and  returned  to  France  as 
choirmaster  to  the  Dauphin.  Driven  out  by  the  intrigues  of  Lully,  he  entered 
the  service  of  Mile,  de  Guise,  of  the  Duke  of  Orleans  and  of  the  Jesuit  Col- 
lege, finally  becoming  choirmaster  at  the  Sainte  Chapelle.  He  was  Lully’s 
special  rival,  but  in  spite  of  real  ability  was  unable  to  compete  with  him  in 
royal  favor.  He  wrote  many  ballets  (from  about  1675),  a few  operas  (as 
Medee , 1694),  and  18  oratorios,  with  psalms  and  masses. 

Pascal  Colasse  (d.  1709)  was  Lully’s  pupil  and  long  his  assistant  in  com- 
pleting his  operas.  A royal  favorite,  from  1677  he  was  concertmaster  at  the 
Opera  and  from  1683  held  court  positions,  besides  an  operatic  privilege  at 
Lille.  Of  his  10  operas  (1687-1706)  the  best  was  Thetis  et  Pelee  (1689). 
The  failure  of  some,  with  other  trials,  drove  him  to  alchemy  and  finally  into 
insanity.  Marin  Marais  (d.  1728),  another  pupil  of  Lully,  from  1685  in  the 
royal  orchestra,  wrote  4 operas  (1693-1709),  with  many  pieces  for  the  gamba 
(see  sec.  112).  Henri  Desmarets  (d.  1741)  began  his  career  as  a musical 
page  to  the  king,  competing  unsuccessfully  for  a higher  position  in  1683,  and 
after  1700  was  choirmaster  to  Philip  V.  of  Spain,  returning  later  to  serve  the 
Duke  of  Lorraine.  He  wrote  several  operas  and  ballets  (1693-1704,  ’22). 

Andre  Campra  (d.  1744)  was  much  more  important.  After  long  service 
(from  1679)  as  choirmaster  at  Toulon,  Arles,  Toulouse,  the  Jesuit  College, 
the  Sainte  Chapelle  and  Notre  Dame,  from  1697  he  turned  to  secular  music 
and  from  1722  was  court-conductor.  Of  his  perhaps  20  popular  operas  (1697- 
1718,  ’35)  the  most  noted  were  Hesione  { 1700),  Tancrede  (1702)  and  Les  festes 
venitiennes  (1710).  His  style  showed  Italian  influence  and  had  richness  in 
ensemble  and  instrumental  effects. 

Andre  Cardinal  Destouches  (d.  1749),  in  youth  undecided  between  the  priest- 
hood and  the  army,  finally  took  up  music.  His  Isse  (1697)  was  so  successful 
that  he  began  serious  study  and  produced  about  10  operas  (till  1726),  though 
without  reaching  special  eminence,  except  for  the  time.  From  1697  he  was 
royal  inspector  of  music. 

86.  The  German  Singspiel.  — The  term  ‘ singspiel  ’ has  no  pre- 
cise meaning,  being  used  of  any  of  the  German  derivatives  of  the 
mediaeval  plays  in  which  songs  were  introduced  in  the  midst  of 
the  spoken  dialogue  without  distinctly  adding  to  the  dramatic 
effect  by  their  musical  treatment.  The  taste  for  both  part-songs 
and  solo  songs  was  so  early  developed  in  Germany  under  the 
impress  of  folk-music,  that  it  was  inevitable  that  all  dramatic 


THE  GERMAN  SINGSPIEL 


185 


experiments  should  seek  such  musical  extensions  and  decora- 
tion. It  was  natural,  also,  that  an  effort  should  ultimately  be 
made  to  construct  a play  out  of  a chain  of  vocal  numbers  almost 
or  quite  without  spoken  dialogue.  In  this  case  the  singspiel 
differed  from  the  opera  in  the  form  of  music  adopted,  which 
was  not  dramatic,  but  lyrical,  often  laid  out  upon  the  strict 
strophe-plan. 

Song-plays  of  some  sort  are  traceable  in  Germany  as  early  as  the  13th 
and  14th  centuries,  when  they  gradually  detached  themselves  from  the 
original  church  plays.  In  the  15th  century  they  dropped  into  great  vul- 
garity, from  which  in  the  16th  they  were  lifted  again  into  dignity  by  the 
poets  Paul  Rebhun  (d.  1546?),  Hans  Sachs  the  Meistersinger  (d.  1576), 
and  his  follower  Jacob  Ayrer  (d.  1605)  — the  last  of  whom  is  sometimes 
called  the  inventor  of  the  singspiel. 

In  the  17th  century  the  stimulus  of  the  young  Italian  opera  was  early 
felt,  and  what  are  often  styled  the  first  German  operas  (Schiitz’  Dafne , 
1627,  and  Staden’s  Seelewig , 1644)  were  really  singspiele.  From  this  time 
the  singspiel  becomes  merged  in  the  opera,  though  late  in  the  18th  cen- 
tury came  a notable  effort  to  revive  it  as  a distinct  type  (see  sec.  158)  — 
the  result  being  analogous  to  the  English  ballad-opera,  the  French  vaude- 
ville and  the  modern  operetta.  Until  this  later  development  the  singspiel 
exerted  no  important  general  influence,  except  to  modify  slightly  the 
earlier  German  imitations  of  the  Italian  opera.  For  the  most  part  the 
early  story  of  German  opera  is  simply  that  of  the  Italian  type  trans- 
planted. 

87.  The  Opera  in  Germany.  — As  in  Italy,  the  early  culti- 
vation of  dramatic  music  was  wholly  under  the  patronage  of 
powerful  princes  as  a court  luxury.  Among  the  establishments 
where  the  opera  was  thus  taken  up,  that  of  the  Emperor  at 
Vienna  was  the  most  conspicuous,  but  other  courts,  like  Dresden 
and  Munich,  were  early  important.  About  1680  Hamburg  became 
the  chief  centre  in  northern  Europe  for  operatic  music,  a posi- 
tion of  leadership  which  it  retained  until  almost  1740. 

Ere  long  the  erection  of  theatres  or  opera-houses,  more  or  less  public, 
was  undertaken  — Munich,  1651,  Vienna,  1659,  Dresden,  1667,  Nurem- 
berg, 1668,  Hamburg,  1678,  Hanover,  1689,  Brunswick,  1691,  Leipsic,  1691, 
with  Berlin  not  until  1742.  Until  about  1690  the  works  given  were  either 
those  imported  from  Italy  or  those  of  the  singspiel  class. 

The  number  of  singspiele  produced  during  the  century  was  probably  con- 
siderable, but  nearly  all  of  them  have  disappeared. 

Heinrich  Schiitz  of  Dresden  (d.  1672),  altogether  the  strongest  German  com- 
poser of  his  age  (see  sec.  96),  showed  his  sympathy  with  the  new  Italian  dra- 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


1 86 

matic  style  by  setting  a German  version  of  Rinuccini’s  Dafne  (1627)  and  by  a 
ballet,  Orpheus  und  Eurydice  (1636),  the  music  of  which  is  lost.  Sigmund 
Staden  (d.  1655),  a Nuremberg  organist,  wrote  the  earliest  German  musical 
drama  that  is  now  extant,  Das  geistliche  Waldgedicht , Seelewig  (1644),  nomi- 
nally ‘ in  the  Italian  manner,1  but  lacking  many  usual  Italian  features,  while 
showing  the  German  taste  for  orderly  and  expressive  song.  There  are  but 
scattered  references  to  other  works  before  1675. 

Important  advance  waited  for  the  opening  of  the  Hamburg  opera-house  in 
1678,  where  the  writers  of  singspiele  included  Nikolaus  Adam  Strunck  (d. 
1700),  an  extraordinary  violinist  efnployed  at  various  courts  (Brunswick, 
Celle,  Hanover,  Dresden),  and  writing  for  Hamburg  several  German  dramas 
(1678-83)  and  for  Leipsic,  where  in  1691  he  built  an  opera-house,  about  15 
more  in  Italian;  Johann  Theile  (see  sec.  96),  supplying  2 singspiele  (1678)  ; 
Johann  Wolfgang  Franck  of  Hamburg,  who  wrote  14  (1679-86),  besides  many 
sacred  songs  (1681-1700)  ; Johann  Georg  Conradi,  court-choirmaster  at  Oet- 
tingen  and  Kusser’s  predecessor  at  Hamburg,  with  7 (1691-3),  one  or  two  of 
which  were  later  revived  by  others  ; and  Philipp  Krieger  (d.  1725),  organist 
or  choirmaster  at  various  courts  (Copenhagen,  Bayreuth,  Halle,  Weissenfels), 
where  from  1679  he  brought  out  a great  many  singspiele,  two  of  which  were 
repeated  at  Hamburg  (1694). 

The  prominence  of  Vienna  as  a headquarters  of  Italian  opera 
was  due  to  the  exceptional  musical  enthusiasm  of  the  Emperors 
during  the  17th  and  18th  centuries.  In  the  17th,  two  of  these, 
Ferdinand  III.  (1637-57)  and  Leopold  I.  (1657-1705),  were 
composers  of  ability,  besides  being  lavish  in  their  patronage. 
The  court  singers  and  players  sometimes  numbered  as  many  as 
a hundred.  Besides  the  chief  organist  and  director  and  their 
assistants,  toward  the  end  of  the  century  a court-composer 
was  appointed.  Distinguished  composers  and  performers  were 
often  brought  to  Vienna  by  imperial  invitation  for  special  under- 
takings. 

Besides  the  imported  performances  of  works  by  Cavalli  (possibly  in  1642, 
’50,  certainly  in  1662,  at  Innsbruck)  and  by  Cesti  (1665-9),  the  following  resi- 
dent composers,  all  Italians,  are  noteworthy  : — 

Antonio  Bertali  (d.  1669),  for  over  30  years  in  the  imperial  service,  with  8 
operas  (from  1653)  ; Antonio  Draghi  (d.  1700),  still  longer  at  the  court,  with 
the  incredible  number  of  over  1 70  operas,  festal  plays,  serenatas,  ballets,  pro- 
logues, etc.  (from  1661,  mostly  1669-95),  in  many  cases  with  arias  by  the 
Emperor  Leopold  inserted  ; Giovanni  Felice  Sances  (d.  1679),  in  the  Chapel 
from  1637  and  Bertali’s  successor  as  choirmaster  in  1669,  with  1 (1670)  ; and 
Carlo  Agostino  Badia  (d.  1738),  the  first  court-composer,  with  20  operas  and 
many  lesser  dramatic  works  (from  1697)  — not  to  mention  others  whose  stay 
at  Vienna  was  briefer.  In  1696  the  powerful  composer  Fux  appeared,  open- 
ing the  series  of  important  18th-century  writers  (see  secs.  121,  125). 


THE  OPERA  AT  HAMBURG 


87 


At  Munich  the  list  is  also  striking — Johann  Kaspar  Kerll  (d.  1693),  most 
famous  as  an  organist,  who  as  court-choirmaster  led  the  way  with  4 operas 
(1657-68)  ; Giuseppe  Ercole  Bernabei  (d.  1688),  choirmaster  from  1671,  with 
5 (1674-86),  though  chiefly  engaged  in  church  music;  Giuseppe  Antonio 
Bernabei  (d.  1732),  his  son  and  successor,  with  15  (1678-91);  Agostino 
Steffani  (d.  1728),  a protdge  of  the  Elector  from  boyhood,  court-organist  in 
1675-88  (see  Hanover  below),  a highly  trained  and  efficient  composer,  who 
brought  out  here  his  first  operas  (from  1681)  ; and,  as  a link  with  the  next 
century,  Pietro  Torri  (see  sec.  125). 

At  Dresden  the  dominant  influence  in  the  middle  of  the  century  was  that 
of  Schiitz,  whose  two  early  dramas  have  been  mentioned.  But  the  Italian 
Giovanni  Andrea  Bontempi  (d.  1705),  coming  from  Venice  to  be  court-choir- 
master  about  1650,  brought  out  here  3 operas  (1662-73)  I and  Carlo  Pallavicino 
ended  his  career  here  in  1688,  his  last  work  being  completed  by  Strunck.  For 
a quarter-century  operatic  interest  was  slight,  until  revived  by  the  important 
works  of  Lotti  in  1717. 

At  Hanover  the  one  name  of  importance  is  Steffani,  already  named  at 
Munich,  who  was  court-choirmaster  from  1688  till  succeeded  in  1710  by  Han- 
del, producing  some  10  operas  with  signal  success,  his  mature  style  compar- 
ing favorably  with  that  of  his  greater  contemporaries.  It  was  here  that  his 
gifts  as  a political  agent  secured  him  honors  from  the  Elector  and  a bishopric 
from  the  Pope. 

At  Brandenburg  and  Berlin  under  the  patronage  of  the  Prussian  court  the 
giving  of  operas  began  just  before  1700  with  some  small  works  by  Karl 
Friedrich  Rieck  (d.  1704),  the  royal  choirmaster,  and  a few  by  visiting  musi- 
cians. Progress  then  waited  till  the  opening  of  an  opera-house  and  the  advent 
of  Graun  about  1740. 

That  which  gave  Hamburg  its  peculiar  eminence  in  opera  at 
the  opening  of  the  18th  century  was  the  marked  ability  of  two 
composers,  Kusser  and  Keiser,  both  Germans,  but  both  sensi- 
tive to  cosmopolitan  influences. 

Johann  Sigismund  Kusser  [Cousser]  (d.  1727),  a musician’s  son  at  Press- 
burg,  received  his  first  training  there  and  at  Stuttgart.  He  moved  much  from 
place  to  place  in  his  career,  being  from  1682  court-musician  at  Stuttgart,  from 
1683  at  Strassburg,  from  about  1690  at  Brunswick  (or  Wolfenbuttel),  from  1693 
director  of  the  Hamburg  opera,  from  1698  at  Stuttgart  again,  from  1704  teach- 
ing singing  in  London,  and  from  1710  viceroyal  choirmaster  at  Dublin.  His 
talents  as  organizer  and  leader  immediately  advanced  the  Hamburg  opera  to 
importance,  so  that  he  is  said  to  have  been  the  first  really  to  establish  in  Ger- 
many the  well-developed  Italian  art  of  dramatic  singing.  He  wrote  1 1 operas, 
of  which  7 were  produced  at  Brunswick  (from  1690),  3 more  at  Hamburg  (from 
1693)  and  1 at  Stuttgart  (1698).  Only  one,  Jason  (1697),  has  survived  entire. 
His  style  was  not  far  removed  from  that  of  the  singspiel. 

Reinhard  Keiser  (d.  1739),  horn  near  Weissenfels  in  1674  and  trained  by 
his  father  and  at  the  Thomasschule  in  Leipsic,  stands  out  as  the  most  famous 
name  in  the  early  German  opera,  though  in  absolute  genius  not  of  the  highest 


1 88 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


rank.  Before  he  was  20,  he  won  applause  by  an  opera  at  Brunswick  (1692),  so 
that  he  aspired  to  be  heard  at  Hamburg.  Most  of  his  subsequent  career  was 
passed  there,  except  3 years  at  Weissenfels  (from  1706),  2 at  Ludwigsburg 
(from  1719),  and  7 at  Copenhagen  (from  1722).  His  official  positions  varied, 
but  he  was  always  a leading  spirit  in  musical  enterprises.  He  is  said  to  have 
written  116  operas  or  similar  works,  4 Passions,  many  solo  cantatas  and  songs, 
motets,  etc.  His  most  brilliant  period  was  about  1700,  noted  works  being 
Adonis  (1697),  La  forza  della  virtu  (1700),  Claudius  Cdsar  (1703,  with  Italian 
arias  for  the  first  time),  Croesus  (1710),  etc.  In  1706  he  put  forth  a statement 
of  his  dramatic  principles,  which,  however,  he  did  not  always  observe.  Though 
the  subjects  and  the  style  of  his  librettos  were  often  poor,  his  readiness  as  a 
melodist  and  his  clever  handling  of  effects  gave  him  a hold  upon  popular 
attention.  He  devoted  himself  chiefly  to  the  aria  rather  than  to  recitative, 
choruses  or  orchestration,  though  dances  were  used  freely.  His  popularity 
stimulated  other  musicians,  and  he  contributed  to  Handel’s  early  growth 
(see  sec.  120).  With  him  German  subjects  first  came  to  the  front. 

Lesser  composers  at  Hamburg  were  Johann  Philipp  Fortsch  (d.  1732),  a 
versatile  physician,  with  about  10  operas  (1686-90)  ; and  Georg  Bronner 
(d.  1724),  Reiser’s  predecessor  as  director,  with  6-7  (1693-1702). 

In  Copenhagen  the  first  opera  (1689)  was  by  Paul  Christian  Schindler 
(d.  1740). 

88.  The  English  Masque.  — In  England  the  dramatic  form 
that  led  toward  the  opera  was  the  ‘ masque,’  originally  im- 
ported from  Italy  in  the  16th  century,  but  specially  developed 
by  English  poets.  This  was  a piece  of  private  theatricals  in 
which  members  of  high  society  in  disguise  (whence  the  name) 
acted  out  a mythological  or  other  fanciful  story  with  dialogue 
and  declamation,  much  dancing,  elaborate  scenic  effects  and,  as 
time  went  on,  considerable  singing  and  incidental  pieces  for  in- 
struments. 

Though  resembling  the  French  ballet  at  first,  the  masque  came  to  differ 
in  its  greater  literary  finish,  since  many  of  the  best  poets  undertook  it 
(like  Ben  Jonson,  Chapman,  Fletcher,  Milton,  etc.).  The  fashionable 
court  attention  to  it  under  the  Stuarts  checked  the  advance  of  the  more 
serious  drama.  Under  the  Commonwealth  masques  were  at  length  sup- 
pressed because  of  their  tendency  to  coarseness,  but  with  the  Restoration 
in  1660  they  came  in  again. 

Throughout  the  century  almost  all  leading  English  com- 
posers wrote  masque  music,  and  thus  gradually  the  musical 
masque  became  important  (sometimes  under  the  Italian  name 
‘opera’).  Its  development  into  a national  type  of  musical 
drama  hardly  came  to  pass,  but  the  operatic  genius  Purcell 
was  influenced  by  it  more  or  less. 


THE  ENGLISH  MASQUE 


189 


It  should  be  added  that  in  England,  as  elsewhere,  there  was  much 
writing  of  detached  songs  or  scenes  either  as  incidentals  to  some  spoken 
drama  or  in  a similar  style,  so  that  any  list  of  masque-writers  might 
be  reasonably  extended  to  include  many  composers  of  ‘ ayres 1 and 
the  like. 

It  has  been  the  fashion  to  say  that  the  Puritans  were  hotly  opposed  to 
all  music,  simply  because  they  objected  to  the  ornate  cathedral  services 
and  to  the  abuses  of  the  theatre.  Yet  all  the  Puritan  leaders  were  inter- 
ested in  music  itself,  many  of  them,  like  Milton,  being  expert  in  it,  and  it 
seems  that  the  revival  of  public  concerts  and  even  of  some  sort  of  musical 
plays  in  1656  was  either  by  direction  of  the  Protector  or  with  his  implied 
approval.  During  the  Commonwealth  there  was  a notable  amount  of 
music-printing. 

The  better-known  composers  of  masques  or  similar  plays  were  all  either  in 
court  service  or  engaged  in  church  music  — in  1607-13  Thomas  Campion 
(d.  1620),  poet  and  physician ; in  1609  (Ayres)  Alfonso  Ferrabosco  (d.  1628), 
the  second  of  the  name,  born  in  England  of  Italian  parents ; in  1613-4  John 
Coperario  [Cooper]  (d.  1627),  lutist,  gambist  and  court -teacher ; in  1613 
Nicholas  Lanier  (d.  1666),  royal  choirmaster  from  1640,  who  is  said  to  have 
been  the  introducer  of  the  recitative  into  England;  in  1613  William  Lawes 
(d.  1645)  ; in  1634  (Comus)  Henry  Lawes  (d.  1662),  his  brother;  in  1653-75 
Matthew  Locke  (d.  1677)  ; in  1667  Pelham  Humphrey  (d.  1674)  ; in  1667-77 
John  Banister,  Sr.  (d.  1679),  an  eminent  violinist ; from  1675  Henry  Purcell 
(d.  1695),  the  crowning  genius  of  the  period;  in  1676-1706  Jeremiah  Clarke 
(d.  1707)  ; in  1681-1707  (over  40  works)  John  Eccles  (d.  1735)  I m 1695-1707 
Daniel  Purcell  (d.  1717)  ; and  in  1700  John  Weldon  (d.  1736).  Masques 
continued  to  be  written  much  later,  as  by  Arne  (d.  1778)  in  1733  and 
after,  but  they  were  overshadowed  by  the  Italian  opera  under  Handel  and 
others. 

89.  Purcell.  — The  one  master  with  both  dramatic  and 
musical  gifts  was  the  extraordinary  Purcell,  whose  fertile 
originality,  in  spite  of  the  brevity  of  his  career,  brought  the 
century  to  a brilliant  close.  Making  up  for  the  lack  of  travel 
by  intuition  and  assiduous  study,  he  seized  upon  the  finest 
points  in  the  Italian  style,  combined  them  with  some  features 
(especially  in  choral  writing)  strangely  neglected,  and  applied 
them  to  the  treatment  of  plots  that  were  essentially  strong. 
Purcell’s  use  of  Continental  methods  had  been  prefigured  by 
Humphrey,  who  might  have  been  another  strong  opera-writer 
if  his  life,  too,  had  been  longer,  but  he  himself  outstripped  all 
before  in  true  melody,  in  characteristic  and  telling  accompani- 
ments, in  delineation  of  personages  and  situations,  and  in  daring 
innovations  in  constructive  detail.  His  many-sidedness  is  re- 


190 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


markable,  since  he  worked  with  equal  power  in  stately  and 
thoughtful  church  music,  in  festal  odes  and  tributes,  in  purely 
chamber  music,  and  in  every  grade  of  opera.  The  culmination 
of  his  dramatic  efforts  came  when  he  was  joined  by  Dryden  as 
a poetic  collaborateur.  Even  before  he  died,  his  superiority  was 
well  discerned,  while  now  he  appears  as  one  of  the  most  crea- 
tive geniuses  of  the  century.  It  is  a tragedy  of  history  that  his 
career  was  not  only  so  short,  but  so  utterly  devoid  of  conse- 
quence. After  him  no  native  English  writer  appeared  to  fill 
his  place  or  continue  his  work. 

Pelham  Humphrey  (d.  1674,  aged  27)  was  a choirboy  in  the  Chapel  Royal 
when  it  was  organized  afresh  in  1660,  and  wrote  anthems  before  he  was  17. 
In  1664  the  king  sent  him  to  France,  where  he  was  a pupil  of  Lully.  In  1666 
he  reentered  the  Chapel  for  a year,  and  in  1672  became  choirmaster,  with  the 
title  of  composer  as  well.  His  compositions  include  25  anthems  and  many 
songs,  some  written  for  the  masque  The  Tempest  (1667).  In  these  appears 
that  taste  for  declamatory  passages  which  suggests  his  latent  operatic  talent. 

Henry  Purcell  (d.  1695,  aged  37),  the  most  famous  of  a musical  family,  early 
left  an  orphan,  became  a choirboy  in  the  Chapel  Royal,  first  under  Cooke, 

then  under  Humphrey,  later  studying 
also  with  Blow.  His  evident  genius  led 
in  1675  to  his  setting  a play  by  Tate 
(later  poet-laureate),  and  its  success 
encouraged  him  to  put  forth  songs  and 
musical  dramas  in  quick  succession. 
In  1680  he  became  organist  at  West- 
minster and  in  1682  also  at  the  Chapel, 
turning  his  attention  for  a time  to  an- 
thems, chamber  music  and  numerous 
festal  odes.  His  compositions  include, 
besides  3 services  and  at  least  100 
anthems,  a great  number  of  solo  and 
other  songs  and  some  good  chamber 
pieces,  almost  40  dramatic  works, 
both  masques  or  plays  with  incidental 
music  and  full  operas,  of  which  King 
Arthur  (1691)  is  chief.  The  number 
of  important  poets  who  furnished  texts 
is  extraordinary,  including  Shadwell, 
Tate,  Beaumont  and  Fletcher,  Congreve,  D'Urfey  and  Dryden,  and  the  ver- 
satile instinct  with  which  he  supplied  settings  for  their  varied  plays  shows  a 
dramatic  artist  of  the  first  order.  While  claiming  that  his  wish  was  to  in- 
troduce the  “ seriousness  and  gravity  11  of  “ the  most  famed  Italian  masters,” 
and  catching  from  the  French  also  a taste  for  dances,  he  contributed  powerful 
ideas  peculiar  to  himself. 


THE  VENETIAN  OPERA  AFTER  1670 


IQI- 

90.  Venetian  Opera-Writers  after  1670.  — The  increase  in  the 
number  of  Italian  operas  about  1670  was  due  to  the  popularity 
of  the  style,  which  stimulated  the  composers  already  at  work, 
called  out  others  in  Venice  itself,  and  gradually  aroused  emula- 
tion in  other  cities,  especially  Bologna  and  Naples.  In  this 
second  period  of  the  Venetian  school  there  is  no  name  of  high 
rank,  though  many  composers  eminent  in  other  fields  worked 
worthily  in  this.  Several  were  extremely  prolific,  but  their  am- 
bition was  simply  to  win  immediate  success  by  catering  skillfully 
to  the  taste  of  the  time.  In  the  eagerness  for  effective  melo- 
dies and  many  of  them,  dramatic  power  and  truth  were  more 
and  more  neglected. 

For  reference,  the  more  notable  writers  of  Venice  and  Bologna  are  here 
enumerated : — 

In  1670  there  were  already  at  work  Carlo  Pallavicino  (d.  1688),  from  1667 
court-choirmaster  at  Dresden,  but  with  many  absences  at  Venice,  where  his 
over  20  operas  (from  1666)  were  mostly  produced,  with  2 oratorios;  and 
Giovanni  Domenico  Partenio  (d.  1701),  from  1666  a singer  at  St.  Mark’s, 
and  Legrenzi’s  successor  there  and  at  the  conservatory,  with  4 (1669-82). 

Giovanni  Domenico  Freschi  (d.  1690),  born  at  Vicenza  and  from  about 
1660  choirmaster  there,  brought  out  14  operas  at  Venice  (from  1671)  and  an 
oratorio,  besides  earlier  masses. 

Antonio  Gianettini  [the  same  as  Zannettini\  (d.  1721),  early  a singer  at 
St.  Mark’s  and  pupil  of  Legrenzi,  from  about  1676  was  court-organist  and  later 
choirmaster  at  Modena,  with  about  10  operas  at  Venice  (1674-1705),  several 
oratorios,  cantatas  and  motets. 

Marc’  Antonio  Ziani  (d.  1715),  choirmaster  at  Mantua  till  1686  and  from 
1700  in  the  Imperial  Chapel  at  Vienna,  made  his  early  reputation  by  over 
20  operas  at  Venice  (1674-99),  with  half  as  many  more  and  about  10 
oratorios  at  Vienna,  besides  many  church  works. 

Giuseppe  Felice  Tosi,  born  at  Bologna  about  1630  and  organist  there  till 
1683,  then  choirmaster  at  Ferrara,  wrote  about  10  operas  for  Bologna,  Venice 
and  other  cities  (1679-91),  besides  some  cantatas  and  psalms. 

Francesco  Antonio  Pistocchi  (d.  1726),  born  at  Palermo  in  1659,  was  also 
associated  with  Bologna,  where  he  was  early  a singer  at  the  cathedral  and  the 
opera.  From  1687  at  Parma,  about  1697  at  Ansbach  (Bavaria),  in  1700  at 
Vienna,  in  1701  he  returned  to  Bologna  and  presently  founded  the  famous 
singing-school  that  soon  became  a model  for  others.  He  wrote  several  operas 
(1679-1700),  mostly  for  Venice,  with  3 oratorios,  many  cantatas  and  motets. 
A curious  book  of  his  pieces  for  instruments  was  published  when  he  was  but 
8 years  old  (1667). 

Jacopo  Antonio  Perti  (d.  1756),  born  at  Bologna  in  1661,  is  chiefly  dis- 
tinguished as  a church  composer,  being  choirmaster  at  Bologna  from  1690, 
after  service  at  Modena  and  Rome.  He  wrote  about  20  operas  (1679-1717) 
for  Modena,  Bologna  and  Venice,  with  over  15  oratorios  and  4 Passions. 


*i92 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


Domenico  Gabrieli  (d.  1690),  an  eminent  ’cellist  of  Bologna,  from  1688  at 
Modena,  brought  out  11  operas  (from  1683),  mostly  at  Venice,  with  an 
oratorio  (1687),  besides  cantatas  and  instrumental  dances. 

Antonio  Lotti  (d.  1740),  born  about  1667,  a pupil  of  Legrenzi,  was  all  his 
life  connected  with  St.  Mark’s,  being  singer  from  1687,  second  organist  from 
1692,  first  from  1704,  and  choirmaster  from  1736.  He  was  strongest  as  a 
church  composer  and  teacher,  but  in  opera-writing  he  was  also  one  of  the 
links  between  the  older  style  and  that  of  Scarlatti  and  Handel.  At  Venice  he 
produced  over  20  operas  (1683,  ’93,  ’96,  1707-17,  ’36),  and,  invited  to  Dresden 
in  1 7 1 7—9  with  his  wife  (who  was  an  able  singer)  and  a competent  company, 
he  added  3 more,  besides  1 at  Vienna  (1716)  and  2 oratorios  (1712).  He 
was  rather  a melodist  and  a master  of  finished  style  than  a dramatist,  beauty 
of  external  effect  being  uppermost.  He  was  cautious  with  instruments,  lest 
they  should  overpower  the  voices. 

Carlo  Francesco  Polaroli  (d.  1722),  born  at  Brescia  and  a pupil  of  Legrenzi, 
preceded  Lotti  at  St.  Mark’s,  being  singer  from  1665,  second  organist  from 
1690  and  vice-choirmaster  from  1692.  Entering  the  operatic  field,  he  far  out- 
stripped Lotti  in  prolificness,  producing  nearly  70  operas  (1684-1721),  besides 
3 oratorios  for  Vienna  (c.  1710).  Though  writing  rapidly  and  superficially, 
his  talent  was  above  the  average.  His  Roderico  (1684)  was  widely  repeated, 
and  in  Faramondo  (1699)  are  found  arias  in  da  capo  form,  accompanied  recita- 
tives, etc.,  analogous  to  those  of  Scarlatti. 

Attilio  Ariosti  (d.  c.  1740),  born  at  Bologna  in  1660,  left  the  priesthood 
to  devote  himself  to  the  viola  d’  amore  and  the  opera.  In  Italy  he  wrote  4 
operas  for  Venice  and  Bologna  (1686-1706)  and  a Passion  (1693).  He  was 
court-choirmaster  at  Berlin  in  1698-1705,  where  he  added  2 more  (1700), 
with  4 at  Vienna  (1703-8)  and  4 oratorios.  In  1715  he  went  to  London, 
composing  8 more  (1723-7),  winning  success  especially  with  Coriolano  (1723) 
and  Lucius  Verus  (1726),  but  was  outclassed  by  Handel  and  returned  to 
Italy.  He  was  a well-trained  musician,  but  in  opera  imitated  Lully  and 
Scarlatti. 

Other  North  Italian  opera- writers  whose  work  extended  into  the  18th 
century  were  Caldara  (d.  1736),  later  eminent  at  Vienna,  with  several  operas 
at  Venice  (from  1689)  ; Albinoni  (d.  1745),  a fine  violinist,  with  about  50 
(1694-1741),  besides  many  other  works ; Aldrovandini,  a pupil  of  Perti,  with 
15  at  various  cities  (1696-1711)  and  5 oratorios  (1691-1706);  and  M.  A. 
Bononcini  (d.  1726),  with  19  (1697-1710).  This  list  might  be  indefinitely 
extended,  as  the  period  was  excessively  prolific  in  works  of  short-lived  in- 
fluence. 

91.  The  Opera  at  Rome  and  Naples.  — While  at  the  end  of 
the  century  operatic  enthusiasm  was  keen  at  Venice  and  Bo- 
logna, so  that  new  works  were  put  forth  in  large  numbers  with 
great  popular  success,  the  rest  of  Italy  was  content  to  take  its 
operas  mostly  from  these  two  cities.  But  there  were  signs  of  a 
dramatic  development  at  Naples,  especially  when  the  genius  of 
Alessandro  Scarlatti  began  to  reveal  itself.  With  him  properly 


RISE  OF  THE  NEAPOLITAN  OPERA 


193 


begins  the  Neapolitan  opera,  which  was  destined  in  the  18th 
century  to  supersede  the  Venetian  and  to  give  the  law  for  all 
Italian  opera  throughout  Europe  (see  sec.  125).  A few  opera- 
writers  also  appeared  at  Rome. 

The  rise  of  the  Neapolitan  school  was  due  not  only  to  the  genius  of 
particular  composers,  but  to  the  steady  and  diffused  influence  of  four 
conservatories,  all  founded  in  the  16th  century,  which  were  important 
centres  of  instruction  till  the  18th.  These  were  Sta.  Maria  di  Lo- 
reto, founded  in  1566  (though  begun  as  a small  enterprise  in  1535), 
S.  Onofrio  a Caftuana,  1576,  De%  Poveri  di  Gesic  Cristo , 1589,  and  Della 
Pieta  de'  Turchini , 1583  (but  not  definitely  devoted  to  music  till  late  in 
the  17th  century).  These  were  all  originally  designed  as  charity-schools 
for  poor  children,  but  in  time  they  became  notable  institutions  of  popular 
art.  They  attracted  large  bequests  and  distinguished  teachers,  and 
often  counted  their  pupils  by  hundreds.  Nearly  all  the  great  musicians 
later  associated  with  Naples  were  students  at  one  or  more  of  these 
schools.  In  1744  the  third  was  transformed  into  a theological  school, 
in  1797  the  first  and  second  were  united,  and  in  1808  the  fourth  was  dis- 
continued. Immediately  after  was  established  the  Real  Conservatorio  di 
Musica , which  took  the  place  of  all  and  still  continues  worthily  the  noble 
traditions  of  three  centuries  of  musical  fruitfulness. 

Alessandro  Stradella  (d.  1681  ?)  should  probably  be  named  here,  though 
biographically  he  is  an  enigma.  It  is  conjectured  that  he  was  born  at  Naples 
about  1645,  and  that  he  was  murdered  at  Genoa.  An  extensive  romance  has 
grown  up  about  him  that  may  or  may  not  be  true,  at  least  giving  a fictitious 
interest  to  his  career,  while  some  music  has  been  attributed  to  him  that  was 
really  later.  He  is  said  to  have  been  a fine  singer  and  harpist.  He  left  a 
notable  number  of  works,  about  150  in  all,  including  10  operas  (c.  1665-81), 
8 oratorios  (from  1676),  numerous  cantatas,  duets  and  madrigals,  which  show 
him  to  have  been  correct  and  skillful,  but  not  specially  profound.  His 
oratorio  S.  Giovanni  Battista  (published  1676)  is  his  best-known  work. 

Bernardo  Pasquini  (d.  1710),  the  famous  Roman  organist  (see  sec.  104), 
wrote  7 operas  (1672-92),  one  for  the  opening  of  a new  opera-house  and  one 
for  the  private  circle  of  the  famous  ex-Queen  Christina  of  Sweden,  then 
resident  in  Rome. 

Francesco  Provenzale  is  the  first  prominent  composer  at  Naples,  where  he 
produced  2 operas  (1670-1)  and  some  oratorios  elsewhere,  besides  being  a 
successful  teacher  and  church  writer. 

Alessandro  Scarlatti  (d.  1725)  is  also  to  be  mentioned  because  his  active 
career  began  some  time  before  the  century  closed,  first  at  Rome,  later  at 
Naples.  About  10  of  his  operas  and  at  least  3 oratorios  appeared  before 
1700  (from  1679),  mostly  at  Rome  (see  sec.  125). 


o 


CHAPTER  XII 


PROGRESS  IN  CHURCH  MUSIC 

92.  In  General.  — As  compared  with  the  16th  century,  the 
17th  was  much  less  productive  of  church  music  of  a high  order, 
since  the  new  zeal  for  dramatic  music  absorbed  the  best  atten- 
tion of  both  musicians  and  the  public.  In  Italy,  in  spite  of  the 
efforts  of  a small  number  of  conservatives,  the  drift  toward 
secular  works  and  a secular  handling  of  sacred  ones  was  over- 
whelming. In  Germany,  however,  amid  many  changes  observ- 
able in  the  treatment  of  sacred  music,  a worthy  development 
began  in  Protestant  choir  and  organ  music  on  the  basis  of  the 
chorale.  This  movement  was  augmented  by  that  vigorous  in- 
terest in  the  problems  of  inner  musical  construction  which  has 
always  marked  German  music  as  compared  with  Italian.  These 
efforts  pointed  toward  the  culmination  of  Protestant  music  under 
Bach  in  the  18th  century.  In  England,  also,  there  were  inter- 
esting, though  not  remarkable,  movements. 

Dramatic  music  inevitably  affected  all  church  music,  working 
an  emphatic  revolution  from  the  severe  polyphony  of  earlier 
times  and  often  leading  to  a questionable  sensuousness  or  sen- 
sationalism. In  many  instances  whatever  was  successful  on 
the  operatic  stage  was  transferred  to  the  church  (of  course  with 
religious  words).  The  oratorio  was  recognized  as  the  link  be- 
tween the  two  fields,  and  it  was  frequently  undertaken  in  both 
Italy  and  Germany,  though  with  contrasted  results.  All  these 
efforts,  also,  were  important  in  relation  to  progress  after  1700. 

More  distinctive  was  the  attention  to  organ  music  as  a spe- 
cialty. Here  the  impulse  came  from  Italy,  but  the  greatest  prog- 
ress was  in  Germany.  The  organ  itself  now  became  more 
complete,  virtuosity  became  gradually  common,  and  steady  gains 
were  made  in  devising  forms  of  composition  germane  to  the 
instrument.  Through  them  the  wealth  of  suggestion  in  chorale 
music  was  taken  up  and  under  polyphonic  manipulation 
wrought  into  works  of  abiding  value. 

194 


CHURCH  MUSIC  AT  ROME 


195 


93.  The  Roman  School.  — It  was  natural  that  at  Rome  an 
effort  should  be  put  forth  to  maintain  the  traditions  of  the  Pa- 
lestrina style,  with  its  strictly  a cappella  effects,  its  restraint  and 
purity  of  structure,  and  its  quality  of  unworldliness,  and  that 
some  new  writers  should  seek  to  add  to  its  repertory.  Their 
success  was  relatively  small,  so  that  it  is  commonly  said  that 
the  Palestrina  style  ceased  by  1650.  This  is  not  strictly  true, 
since  worthy  names  in  the  succession  can  be  cited  beyond  the 
17th  century,  but  the  style  was  no  longer  a positive  historic  force. 

Certain  changes  in  style  crept  in  more  and  more,  though  often 
resisted.  Chief  of  these  was  the  use  of  the  organ  for  accompani- 
ment,which  became  a matter  of  course  in  most  cases  (though  not 
in  the  Papal  Chapel,  where  there  was  no  organ).  Another  was 
the  Venetian  device  of  several  groups  of  voices,  producing  what 
are  called  ‘ polychoric  ’ effects.  Another  was  the  introduction 
of  solo  passages  and  the  handling  of  voices  in  ways  not  strictly 
choral.  This  involved  the  use  of  song-forms  and  often  florid 
vocal  ornaments,  neither  of  which  were  germane  to  the  older 
style.  As  far  as  possible  the  Roman  school  sought  to  avoid 
the  powerful  drift  toward  the  concertistic  or  theatrical  style, 
thus  recognizing  a distinction  that  has  been  a subject  of  debate 
ever  since. 

None  of  the  pontificates  during  the  century  were  of  musical  impor- 
tance, though  Urban  VIII.  (1623-44)  took  pains  to  complete  certain 
service-books,  and  Alexander  VII.  (1665-7)  was  a noted  patron  of  lit- 
erature and  the  fine  arts. 

Without  attempting  an  exhaustive  catalogue,  certain  composers  should  be 
enumerated : — 

Agostino  Agazzari  (d.  1640),  born  at  Siena  in  1578,  was  from  about  1609 
choirmaster  at  various  Roman  churches  and  later  perhaps  at  Siena.  A pro- 
lific composer  of  motets,  masses  and  madrigals  (from  1596),  he  is  notable  as 
one  of  the  first  to  use  organ-accompaniments  with  a figured  bass  and  to  indi- 
cate rules  for  the  latter  (1607).  He  also  published  a tract  aiming  to  elucidate 
the  edicts  on  church  music  of  the  Council  of  Trent. 

Antonio  Cifra  (d.  c.  1638),  born  in  1575,  a pupil  of  Palestrina  and 
G.  M.  Nanino,  was  choirmaster  at  Loreto  in  1613-21  and  again  from  about 
1628,  in  the  interval  being  two  years  at  the  Lateran  and  five  in  Austria.  His 
very  numerous  and  excellent  works  (from  1600)  included  masses,  motets, 
psalms,  madrigals,  part-songs  and  ricercari. 

Romano  Michsli  (d.  c.  1655),  a pupil  of  Soriano  and  Nanino,  was  choir- 
master at  S.  Luigi  dei  Francesi  from  about  1625.  In  his  writings  (from  1610) 
he  emphasized  complicated  canons  in  a style  that  he  claimed  to  be  his  own. 


196 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


Vincenzo  Ugolini  (d.  1626),  born  at  Perugia,  was  choirmaster  at  Sta.  Maria 
Maggiore  from  about  1603,  though  partly  laid  aside  by  illness  (and  somewhat 
an  invalid  thereafter),  at  Benevento  from  1609,  at  S.  Luigi  dei  Francesi  from 
1615,  and  at  St.  Peter’s  from  1620.  Recognized  as  an  authority  on  the  Pale- 
strina style,  he  was  much  sought  as  a teacher.  In  his  masses,  motets,  psalms 
and  madrigals  (1614-30)  he  often  used  organ-accompaniments  with  figured  bass. 

Gregorio  Allegri  (d.  1652),  born  in  1584  and  another  of  G.  M.  Nanino’s 
pupils,  after  serving  as  singer  at  Fermo,  entered  the  Papal  Chapel  in  1629, 
remaining  in  honor  till  his  death.  His  works  are  chiefly  motets  (partly 
published  from  1618,  but  largely  in  MS.).  The  most  famous,  though  not  the 
best,  is  his  Miserere  for  9 voices  in  two  choirs,  officially  sanctioned  for  use 
on  Wednesday  and  Friday  of  Holy  Week  in  the  Sistine  Chapel,  the 
reproduction  of  which  was  ultimately  forbidden.  The  charm  of  this  as  there 
rendered  and  the  barriers  thrown  about  it  have  given  it  a fictitious  renown. 
[At  least  13  such  settings  of  the  Miserere  have  been  authorized,  from  that 
of  Festa  (1517)  to  those  of  Baj  (1714)  and  ofBaini  (1821).] 

Stefano  Landi  (d.  after  1639),  born  about  1590,  was  choirmaster  at  Padua 
and  from  1629  in  the  Papal  Choir.  He  was  an  expert  in  the  old  style  (works 
from  1618),  but  also  wrote  solos  and  duets,  besides  two  dramatic  works. 

Paolo  Agostini  (d.  1629,  aged  36),  the  pupil  and  son-in-law  of  G.  B.  Nanino, 
had  a short  life,  but  one  full  of  activity.  After  being  employed  in  different 
Roman  churches,  in  1627  he  succeeded  Ugolini  at  St.  Peter’s.  His  motets, 
masses  and  psalms  (partly  published  from  1619)  were  technically  able,  in- 
volving extreme  contrapuntal  skill  and  sometimes  using  as  many  as  48  voices. 

Antonio  Maria  Abbatini  (d.  1677),  born  about  1595,  was  choirmaster  of 
various  Roman  churches  and  at  Loreto  all  his  active  life,  beginning  with  the 
Lateran  in  1626-8,  and  including  three  terms  at  Sta.  Maria  Maggiore.  Besides 
church  music  (from  1627),  he  wrote  cantatas,  madrigals  and  dramatic  works. 

Virgilio  Mazzocchi  (d.  1646),  after  one  year  at  the  Lateran,  was  from  1629 
choirmaster  at  St.  Peter’s.  The  author  of  many  motets  (from  1640)  and  2 
oratorios,  he  is  notable  as  a leader  in  the  change  from  the  stricter  style  to  one 
more  sensuously  effective,  and  as  the  founder  of  a music-school  of  repute. 

Pier  Francesco  Valentini  (d.  1654),  a pupil  of  G.  M.  Nanino,  was,  like 
Micheli,  a specialist  in  canon-writing  of  the  highest  intricacy  and  considerable 
artistic  value  (from  1629).  In  one  of  his  books  he  proposed  a theme  of  which 
over  2000  solutions  are  possible,  samples  of  which  are  given  for  2,  3,  4 and  5 
voices ; in  another  are  canons  for  6,  10  and  12  voices  ; in  another,  some  for  96 
voices!  He  also  wrote  motets,  madrigals  and  2 slight  dramas  (1654). 

Orazio  Benevoli  (d.  1672),  born  in  1602,  studied  under  Ugolini  and  was  his 
most  able  successor  in  learned  polyphony.  Beginning  as  choirmaster  at  S. 
Luigi  dei  Francesi,  he  was  called  to  Vienna,  but  returned  in  1646  to  St.  Peter’s, 
following  Mazzocchi.  All  his  works  were  sacred,  but  partly  published  (from 
1628).  He  was  amazingly  skillful  in  works  of  gigantic  structure,  employing 
many  voices  (up  to  48),  disposed  in  4-12  groups  or  choirs,  and  often  added 
extensive  polyphonic  instrumental  parts. 

Francesco  Foggia  (d.  1688),  born  in  1604,  was  trained  by  Cifra,  G.  B. 
Nanino  and  Agostini,  and  married  the  latter’s  daughter.  In  his  youth  he  held 
court  positions  at  Cologne,  Munich  and  Vienna,  followed  by  short  engage- 


CHURCH  MUSIC  AT  ROME 


97 


ments  in  Italy.  From  1643  he  was  choirmaster  at  the  Lateran,  from  1661  at 
S.  Lorenzo  in  Damaso  and  from  1678  at  Sta.  Maria  Maggiore.  His  abundant 
works  (from  1642  or  in  MS.)  are  written  in  a pure  and  noble  style,  almost 
untouched  by  the  concertistic  drift.  He  was  one  of  the  first  Italians  to  use 
the  tonal  as  distinct  from  the  real  fugue  (see  sec.  103). 

Bonifacio  Gratiani  (d.  1664),  born  in  1605,  from  1649  choirmaster  at  the 
Seminario  and  the  Jesuit  Church,  composed  a prodigious  amount  of  sacred 
music  (published  posthumously),  which  was  highly  regarded  at  the  time. 

Antimo  Liberati  (d.  after  1685),  after  study  with  G.  Allegri  and  Benevoli, 
is  said  to  have  worked  at  Vienna  until  about  1650,  when  he  returned  to  Rome. 
In  1653  he  was  in  the  Papal  Chapel,  and  later  served  two  of  the  city  churches. 
He  left  considerable  church  music,  several  oratorios  and  some  literary  remains. 

Matteo  Simonelli  (d.  after  1688),  pupil  of  the  same  masters  and  a patient 
student  of  Palestrina’s  works,  entered  the  Papal  Chapel  in  1662  and  later  was 
choirmaster  elsewhere  in  Rome.  His  many  works  (left  in  MS.)  were  so 
finished  and  noble  in  style  as  to  give  him  the  name  of ‘the  Palestrina  of  the 
17th  century.’ 

Giuseppe  Ottavio  Pitoni  (d.  1743),  born  in  1657  and  living  far  into  the  next 
century,  was  at  once  the  last  of  the  old  school  and  the  connecting  link  with  a 
much  later  period.  Musically  precocious,  he  studied  with  Natale  and  Foggia, 
and  was  minutely  acquainted  with  Palestrina’s  works.  From  the  age  of  16  he 
was  choirmaster  in  provincial  towns,  from  1677  in  the  collegiate  church  of  S. 
Marco  at  Rome,  from  1708  at  the  Lateran  and  from  1719  at  St.  Peter’s,  be- 
sides connections  with  several  other  churches  not  fully  explained.  His  works, 
besides  being  marvels  of  erudition  and  skill,  were  extremely  numerous,  but, 
with  one  exception  (1697),  they  were  not  published,  and  are  still  not  generally 
available.  Like  Benevoli,  he  excelled  in  immense  compositions  for  many  voices 
in  separate  choirs  — at  his  death  he  was  working  on  a mass  for  48  voices  in  12 
choirs.  For  St.  Peter’s  he  prepared  a complete  set  of  masses,  motets  and  vespers 
for  an  entire  year,  including  every  service  in  the  calendar.  Among  his  masses 
some  are  a capftella , some  with  organ  and  other  instruments.  He  also  left  a 
MS.  account  of  all  the  Roman  polyphonists  from  1000  to  1700,  on  which  Baini 
based  his  monograph  upon  Palestrina  (1828),  besides  a small  manual  on  com- 
position (c.  1690).  He  was  an  important  teacher,  as  of  Durante,  Leo  and  Feo. 

A few  lesser  names  may  be  added,  like  Francesco  Severi  (d.  1630),  in  the 
Papal  Chapel  from  1613  and  notable  as  the  author  of  psalms  (1615)  ex- 
emplifying the  overlaying  of  the  voice-parts  with  florid  embellishments ; 
Lorenzo  Ratti  (d.  after  1632),  nephew  and  pupil  of  Ugolini,  with  motets,  lita- 
nies, graduals  and  offertories  for  the  whole  year  (from  1617)  ; Agostino  Diruta 
(d.  after  1668),  from  1622  choirmaster  at  Asola,  and  from  1630  at  S.  Agostino 
in  Rome  (works  from  1617)  ; Giuseppe  Giamberti  (d.  after  1650),  pupil  of 
G.  B.  Nanino  and  Agostini,  in  1629  the  successor  of  D.  Allegri  at  Sta.  Maria 
Maggiore,  who  was  useful  as  the  editor  of  the  new  standard  antiphonary,  be- 
sides writing  motets  (from  1628)  ; Domenico  a Pane,  pupil  of  Abbatini, 
from  1654  in  the  Papal  Choir  and  from  1669  its  leader,  whose  works  (1672-87) 
include  masses  on  themes  from  Palestrina ; and  Giovanni  Battista  Giansetti, 
choirmaster  at  the  Lateran  from  about  1670,  whose  most  noted  work  was  a 
mass  for  48  voices  in  12  choirs  (1675). 


98 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


94.  Venetian  Church  Composers.  — In  the  17th  century  the 

general  contrast  between  the  Roman  and  the  Venetian  schools 
of  sacred  music  that  was  noted  in  the  16th  (see  secs.  55-60)  not 
only  continued,  but  took  on  a new  and  pronounced  form  as  the 
Venetian  opera  advanced. 

This  contrast  is  naturally  viewed  by  different  critics  differently.  To 
the  enthusiast  for  objective  a cappella  polyphony  of  the  purest  Roman 
type  every  deviation  towards  warmer  and  more  subjective  forms  of  expres- 
sion, especially  with  complex  instrumental  accompaniments  and  vocal 
solos,  seems  an  echo  of  the  theatre  and  a concession  to  vulgar  taste. 
But,  on  the  other  hand,  to  many  practical  artists  an  absolute  church  style, 
unconnected  with  all  current  secular  music,  seems  a visionary  and  self-de- 
feating ideal,  so  that  to  them  the  problem  is  not  so  much  to  keep  church 
music  uncontaminated  by  whatever  is  popularly  powerful  as  to  treat  it  in 
any  available  way  that  secures  devotional  elevation.  For  them  the  end 
justifies  the  means,  provided  only  that  the  end  is  fairly  estimated  and  act- 
ually attained.  This  brief  statement  may  serve  as  a key  to  the  profound  an- 
tagonism between  two  great  schools  of  Catholic  music  that  dates  from  the 
17th  century  and  is  still  conspicuous.  It  is  clear  that  there  is  reason  on 
both  sides  and  also  that  each  view  has  dangers  — the  one  of  such  abstrac- 
tion as  to  miss  practical  utility,  the  other  of  such  yielding  to  transient  drifts 
as  to  lose  dignity  and  depth.  The  papal  authorities  have  striven  to  uphold 
an  extremely  conservative  style,  following  in  all  their  official  rules  (in- 
cluding those  of  Pius  X.  in  1903)  the  dictum  of  the  Council  of  Trent  in 
favor  of  nothing  but  Plain-Song  and  strict  a cappella  polyphony.  But 
the  common  usage  of  the  Church,  even  from  about  1600,  has  constantly 
slipped  away  from  the  standards,  often  running  off  into  rather  wild 
vagaries. 

The  innovating  tendencies  included  several  points.  With 
the  development  of  the  organ  and  of  organ-playing  the  desire 
for  freely  handled  accompaniments  steadily  grew,  presently 
reaching  out  after  orchestral  effects  as  well.  With  the  uncover- 
ing of  the  emotional  and  even  passionate  capacities  of  the  individ- 
ual voice  came  the  increasing  use  of  solo  passages  and  solo 
settings  of  entire  texts  (with  accompaniment),  passing  over  into 
concerted  forms  for  two  or  more  solo  voices.  With  the  general 
interest  in  secular  music  as  normative  of  all  musical  style  came 
experiments  with  settings  of  sacred  words  in  rhythmic  and  even 
dainty  styles  that  recalled  the  grace  of  the  folk-song,  the  popu- 
lar part-song,  and  even  the  dance.  All  these  were  essential  in- 
novations. Not  all  of  them  were  first  attempted  by  Venetians, 
since  even  Palestrina  himself  was  not  afraid  of  slight  develop- 
ments in  these  directions.  But,  on  the  whole,  what  was  known 


VENETIAN  CHURCH  MUSIC 


199 


as  the  concertato  style  was  chiefly  Venetian,  receiving  its  impulse 
from  Monteverdi  and  becoming  established  in  honor  under  Le- 
grenzi  and  Lotti,  with  Colonna  of  Bologna.  This  free  style 
naturally  commended  itself  strongly  to  popular  taste. 

Claudio  Monteverdi  (d.  1643)  published  comparatively  little  church  music, 
but  left  more  in  MS.  Never  in  sympathy  with  pure  polyphony,  he  tended 
to  try  new  methods,  sometimes  in  a harsh  or  immature  way.  His  30  years’ 
service  as  choirmaster  at  St.  Mark’s,  however,  gave  him  great  influence  (see 
sec.  77).  His  first  printed  work  was  a set  of  madrigali  spirituali  (1583),  and 
a collection  of  motets,  psalms,  etc.,  with  instrumental  accompaniments  was  one 
of  the  last  (1641). 

Alessandro  Grandi  (d.  1630),  began  as  choirmaster  at  Ferrara  in  1610, 
entered  the  St.  Mark’s  choir  in  1617,  becoming  vice-choirmaster  in  1620,  but 
in  1627  removed  to  Bergamo.  His  many  works  (from  1607)  include  masses, 
motets,  psalms  and  varied  secular  pieces,  the  motets  being  accompanied  from 
the  first,  and  concertato  methods  becoming  obvious  later. 

Giovanni  Rovetta  (d.  1668)  was  early  a choirboy  at  St.  Mark’s  and  suc- 
ceeded Grandi  as  vice-choirmaster  in  1627  and  Monteverdi  as  chief  in  1643. 
He  also  wrote  freely  in  all  forms  (from  1626),  his  style  being  strongly  marked 
by  the  new  ideas  and  continuing  the  traditions  of  his  predecessors. 

Francesco  Cavalli  (d.  1676),  pupil  of  Monteverdi  and  Rovetta’s  successor  in 
1668,  though  almost  50  years  at  St.  Mark’s  (see  sec.  79),  wrote  relatively  little 
church  music  (from  1645). 

Natale  Monferrato  (d.  1685)  also  spent  his  life  at  St.  Mark's,  being  a pupil 
of  Rovetta,  from  1639  a singer  in  the  choir  and  Cavalli’s  unsuccessful  rival  for 
one  of  the  organs,  from  1647  vice-choirmaster  and  Cavalli’s  successor  in  1676. 
He  was  also  a favorite  teacher  and  engaged  in  music-publishing.  His  many 
motets  and  psalms,  with  some  masses  (from  1647),  are  in  the  free  style  of  his 
school. 

Giovanni  Legrenzi  (d.  1690)  studied  with  Rovetta  and  succeeded  Mon- 
"ferrato  in  1685.  During  his  administration  the  orchestra  was  increased  to  34 
players,  including  24  strings,  4 theorbi,  2 cornets,  1 bassoon  and  3 trombones. 
One  of  the  best  early  opera-writers  (see  sec.  81),  he  is  counted  even  better  as 
a church  composer  (works  from  1654),  besides  being  one  of  the  earliest  writers 
of  chamber  music  (from  1655). 

After  him  came  as  choirmasters  Rovettino  in  1690  (organist  since  1665), 
Partenio  from  1692,  and  Biffi  from  1702  — all  better  opera-writers  than  church 
composers. 

Antonio  Lotti  (d.  1740),  also  a fine  opera-writer  (see  sec.  90),  though  not 
choirmaster  till  1736,  following  Biffi,  is  really  next  in  the  succession  at  St. 
Mark’s,  since  he  was  singer  there  from  1687.  Though  largely  occupied  till 
1718  with  operas,  he  wrote  much  church  music  (left  in  MS.)  of  great  dignity 
and  beauty,  marking  him  as  the  culmination  of  the  Venetian  school,  as  well  as 
the  model  for  many  followers  in  the  18th  century. 

Only  second  in  influence  as  a centre  for  church  music  in  the  later  17th  cen- 
tury was  Bologna,  where  the  following  composers  may  be  emphasized : — 


200 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


Adriano  Banchieri  (d.  1634),  born  about  1565,  a pupil  of  Guami,  and  a 
highly  educated  Olivetan  monk,  was  not  only  a learned  author,  but  a practical 
musician  of  influence.  He  was  organist  in  1599-c.  1615,  chiefly  at  Bosco  (near 
Bologna)  and  Imola,  and  founded  a musical  society  which  later  became  the 
famous  Accademia  filar monica  of  Bologna  (still  existing).  His  compositions, 
at  first  secular  (from  1593),  including  several  madrigal-plays,  also  ranged  over 
the  usual  sacred  forms.  In  these  he  showed  a keen  sympathy  with  the  semi- 
dramatic  style  as  against  a cafipella  polyphony. 

Ercole  Porta  was  one  of  the  early  users  of  orchestral  support  for  sacred 
music  (works  from  1609). 

Giovanni  Paolo  Colonna  (d.  1695),  well  trained  at  Rome  under  Abbatini 
and  Benevoli,  was  cathedral-organist  at  Bologna  from  1659  and  choirmaster 
from  1674.  His  numerous  sacred  works  (from  1677,  with  many  in  MS.)  are 
in  a style  that  puts  him  in  the  front  rank  of  the  church  composers  of  the  latter 
part  of  the  century. 

Jacopo  Antonio  Perti  (d.  1756),  another  opera-writer,  was  cathedral-choir- 
master from  1690  and  wrote  fine  sacred  works  (from  1681). 

Other  North  Italian  sacred  composers  were  Guglielmo  Lipparino,  choir- 
master at  Como  from  about  1619  (works,  1600-37)  ; Pietro  Lappi,  choirmaster 
at  Brescia  (works,  all  sacred,  1601-27)  5 Giovanni  Ghizzolo, from  ^^succes- 
sively at  Correggio,  Ravenna,  Padua  and  Novara  (works,  sacred  and  secular, 
1608-25);  Stefano  Bernardi  (d.  1638?),  choirmaster  at  Verona  from  about 
1615  and  at  Salzburg  in  1628-34  (sacred  and  secular  works  from  1611)  ; Ignazio 
Donati  (d.  1638?),  at  various  places  from  1612,  and  at  Milan  from  1631 
(works,  all  sacred,  from  1612)  ; Francesco  Bellazzi,  also  of  Milan,  perhaps  a 
pupil  of  G.  Gabrieli  (works,  all  sacred,  from  1618)  ; Galeazzo  Sabbatini,  choir- 
master at  Mirandola,  noted  as  a madrigalist  (works,  1625-40)  ; Orazio  Tarditi 
(d.  after  1670),  organist  at  various  places  from  1622  and  from  1647  choir- 
master at  Faenza,  a very  prolific  writer,  with  fully  25  collections  (from  1628) 
of  masses,  motets,  psalms,  litanies  and  madrigals,  usually  with  free  use  of  con - 
certato  methods;  Giovanni  Antonio  Rigati  (d.  c.  1649),  early  a singer  at  St. 
Mark’s,  and  from  1636  choirmaster  at  Udine  (works  from  1640)  ; Francesco 
della  Porta  (d.  1666),  choirmaster  at  Milan  from  1645  (works,  all  sacred, 
i637~57)  ; Francesco  Petrobelli,  choirmaster  at  Padua  in  1651-77  (works  from 
1643)  ; and  Giovanni  Battista  Bassani  (d.  1716),  an  able  violinist,  organist  at 
Ferrara  from  1677,  choirmaster  at  Bologna  in  1680-5,  and  then  at  Ferrara 
again,  with  many  sacred  works,  secular  songs  and  some  chamber  music  (from 
1677)  — the  teacher  of  Corelli. 

95.  In  Germany.  — It  was  inevitable  that  in  Germany  there 
should  be  two  diverse  tendencies  in  church  composition,  the  one 
perpetuating  the  older  Catholic  traditions,  the  other  seeking  to 
adapt  music  to  the  new  Protestant  services  and  spirit.  Though 
for  a time  the  distinction  between  these  was  more  nominal  than 
real,  except  regarding  the  chorale,  and  the  earlier  German 
motets  and  other  liturgical  pieces  were  modeled  upon  their  Latin 


CHURCH  MUSIC  IN  GERMANY 


201 


prototypes,  the  separation  of  Protestant  music  gradually  became 
more  obvious.  Chorales  were  immensely  popular  and  their 
number  rapidly  increased.  Their  harmonic  style  pushed  its 
way  into  choir  music,  though  never  driving  out  counterpoint, 
for  which  German  writers  now  began  to  show  their  eminent 
capacity.  While  Italian  power  in  this  field  was  on  the  wane, 
the  Germans  were  preparing  not  only  to  preserve  the  old  skill, 
but  to  open  up  new  achievements  for  it.  This  development  was 
upheld  and  furthered  by  the  growth  of  organ  composition  (see 
Chapter  XIII.). 

The  Thirty  Years’ War  (1618-48)  interfered  with  the  steady  flow  of 
musical  progress.  In  many  places  musical  establishments  were  wholly 
suspended  (notably  at  Dresden)  and  social  life  generally  was  unsettled. 
The  momentum  of  the  early  part  of  the  century,  however,  enabled  the  art 
to  resume  its  place  promptly  after  1650. 

The  Palestrina  style  in  its  purity  was  never  dominant  in  Ger- 
many, though  it  had  its  isolated  disciples.  But  the  connection 
with  northern  Italy  was  close,  and,  so  far  as  definite  influence 
went,  the  Venetian  type  of  church  music  was  more  likely  to  be 
followed.  Schiitz  of  Dresden,  the  ablest  German  composer  of 
the  century,  studied  at  Venice  and  was  fully  alive  to  the  new 
movements  there.  Under  his  lead  and  that  of  some  others,  a 
notable  tendency  set  in  to  apply  concertato  writing  to  church 
use  in  a more  wholesome  and  suitable  way  than  was  common  in 
Italy.  The  German  church  cantata  and  oratorio  soon  began  to 
be  more  significant  than  their  Italian  prototypes,  prefiguring  the 
nobler  work  of  the  18th  century.  Thus  the  new  methods  of 
accompaniments,  solos,  concerted  passages  and  every  device  of 
formal  disposition  was  brought  into  the  church  without  such 
operatic  sensuousness  as  to  be  debilitating.  It  is  from  these 
beginnings  that  modern  German  and  English  church  music  really 
took  their  rise. 

As  samples  of  Catholic  composers,  mostly  in  Austria  or  South  Germany, 
these  names  may  be  noted:  Asprilio  Pacelli  (d.  1623),  who,  after  service  at 
Rome,  was  from  1603  royal  choirmaster  at  Warsaw  (motets  and  psalms  from 
1 597)  ? Johann  Stadlmayr  (d.  1648),  at  Salzburg  in  1603-7,  then  court-choir- 
master at  Innsbruck,  with  masses,  motets,  psalms  and  hymns  (from  1603)  ; 
Giovanni  Felice  Sances  (d.  1679),  °f  Roman  birth,  in  the  Imperial  Chapel  at 
Vienna  from  1637,  second  choirmaster  from  1649  and  first  from  1669,  with 
many  motets,  psalms  and  secular  songs  (from  1633)  ; Felicianus  Schwab 


202 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


[Suevus],  a Franciscan  of  Weingarten  and  Constance  (works,  1634-56)  ; 
Ambrosius  Reiner  (d.  1672),  archducal  choirmaster  at  Innsbruck,  with  masses, 
motets  and  litanies  (1643-56),  in  some  of  which  instruments  were  combined 
with  novel  effect;  Georg  Arnold,  organist  at  Bamberg  (works,  1651-72); 
J.  K.  Kerll  (d.  1693),  the  great  organist  at  Munich  and  Vienna  (see  sec.  105), 
with  important  masses,  etc.  (1669-89),  besides  dramas  and  keyboard  works; 
Johann  Melchior  Gletle,  choirmaster  at  Augsburg,  with  many  masses  and 
motets  (1667-84),  often  including  elaborate  vocal  and  orchestral  combina- 
tions; and  Steffani  (d.  1728),  the  opera-writer  (see  sec.  87),  pupil  of  Kerll, 
from  1667  at  Munich  and  court-organist  from  1675,  and  from  1688  choir- 
master at  Hanover,  with  important  works  (few  published,  1674-85). 

The  centre  of  activity  in  Protestant  music  was  naturally 
Saxony  and  the  neighboring  states.  Here  we  encounter  a 
series  of  composers  who  united  great  technical  skill  with  a 
deep  insight  into  the  possibilities  of  sacred  song  apart  from  the 
Catholic  .ritual.  Being  without  controlling  traditions,  they  ex- 
perimented freely  with  many  forms  from  simple  part-songs  and 
solos  to  extended  counterpoint.  They  evidently  felt  that  there 
was  no  fixed  boundary  between  the  sacred  and  the  secular,  and 
many  of  them  were  eminent  in  both  fields.  Yet  few  of  them 
had  to  do  with  the  opera,  though  not  wholly  averse  to  dramatic 
styles.  Even  when  they  essayed  to  treat  church  music  dra- 
matically, their  innate  German  earnestness  held  them  back  from 
triviality  or  excess. 

In  the  annals  of  German  Protestant  music  the  title  ‘Cantor1  often 
appears.  This  is  practically  equivalent  to  Kapellmeister  as  earlier  used, 
except  that  it  belongs  not  to  a princely  court  or  a cathedral,  but  to  a 
municipality,  implying  some  measure  of  responsibility  for  civic  education. 
The  office  has  existed  in  most  German  towns  and  cities,  sometimes  with 
duties  confined  to  a single  church  or  school,  sometimes  involving  the 
care  of  all  the  official  music  of  the  community  — churches,  schools,  choral 
societies  and  bands  of  players  — the  incumbent  often  having  the  title  of 
‘ Town-Musician.1 

In  many  ways  the  most  famous  instance  has  been  in  the  Thomas- 
schule  at  Leipsic  (see  secs.  117,  193),  where  the  list  of  cantors  begins 
early  in  the  15th  century  and  is  complete  from  1531  to  the  present  time. 
In  the  17th  century  the  cantors  here  were  from  1594  Calvisius , from 
1616  J.  H.  Schein , from  1631  Tobias  Michael,  from  1657  Sebastian  Kn'up- 
fer , from  1677  Johann  Schelle , followed  in  1701  by  Kuhnau  and  in  1722 
by  J.  S.  Bach  — all  dying  in  office  after  an  average  term  of  22  years. 

Christoph  Demantius  (d.  1643),  from  1597  cantor  at  Zittau  and  from  1604 
at  Freiberg  (Saxony),  was  an  abundant  and  versatile  composer  of  both  Latin 
and  German  church  music  (from  1602),  many  secular  songs  and  canzonets 


CHURCH  MUSIC  IN  GERMANY 


203 


(from  1594)  and  various  dances,  together  with  a Passion  (1620)  and  popular 
text-books  for  singing  (1592,  1607). 

Melchior  Franck  (d.  1639),  fr°m  l^°3  choirmaster  at  Coburg,  was  also 
prodigiously  fertile  and  a notable  master  of  melody,  with  church  music,  both 
harmonic  and  contrapuntal  (from  1601),  a Choralbuch  (1631),  secular  songs, 
part-songs  and  dances  — all  in  a style  attractive  to  a modern  taste. 

Erhard  Bodenschatz  (d.  1636),  pastor  near  Eisleben,  edited  invaluable 
collections  of  Protestant  motets  (1603-21)  and  of  chorales  (1608),  besides 
writing  some  works  of  his  own. 

Michael  Pratorius  (d.  1621),  from  1604  choirmaster  at  Wolfenbiittel,  was  a 
gifted  and  prolific  composer  in  many  styles,  besides  being  an  author  of  capital 
importance.  His  sacred  music  (from  1605)  includes  numerous  motets,  psalms 
and  other  choir-pieces,  some  polychoric  for  as  many  as  30  voices,  with  num- 
bers of  chorales  and  songs,  besides  secular  works,  both  vocal  and  instrumental. 
His  Muses  SionicE  (1605-10)  is  a gigantic  collection  of  religious  part-songs, 
some  original.  His  style  was  eclectic,  ranging  from  the  purely  polyphonic  to 
concertistic  solo-writing,  and  richly  illustrates  the  lines  of  progress  going  on 
in  Germany.  (For  his  literary  work,  see  sec.  1 1 3 .)  Pratorius  was  a per- 
sonal friend  ofSchiitz,  as  well  as  his  artistic  relative. 

Johann  Staden  (d.  1634),  from  1609  organist  at  Bayreuth  and  from  1616  at 
Nuremberg,  wrote  varied  sacred  and  secular  works  (from  1606),  including 
many  part-songs  and  dances,  evincing  power  as  a harmonist. 

Johann  Hermann  Schein  (d.  1630),  early  a choirboy  at  Dresden  and  a law- 
student  at  Leipsic,  was  from  1616  cantor  of  the  Thomasschule  there.  His 
smooth,  melodious  and  masterly  style  was  shown  in  a vast  number  of  vocal 
and  instrumental  works  (from  1609),  including  many  concertato  pieces  for 
many  parts  and  a notable  Choralbuch  (1627).  His  genius  was  so  superior 
in  every  way  that  he,  with  Schiitz  of  Dresden  and  Scheidt  of  Halle  (see  secs. 
96,  106),  were  called  ‘the  three  great  S’s  ’ of  the  century. 

Christoph  Thomas  Walliser  (d.  1648)  was  professor  and  musical  director  at 
Strassburg,  with  varied  vocal  works  (from  1602),  including  incidental  music 
for  student-plays,  besides  theoretical  books. 

Johann  Criiger  (d.  1662),  variously  educated  by  study  and  travel,  was  from 
1622  cantor  of  the  Nikolaikirche  at  Berlin.  Besides  being  important  as  a 
theorist,  he  was  famous  as  the  editor  of  hundreds  of  choir-pieces  and  chorales 
(from  1619)  and  of  Choralbiicher  (1644),  adding  works  of  his  own. 

Thomas  Selle  (d.  1663),  from  1637  cantor  at  Hamburg,  was  a fertile  writer  of 
part-music  in  the  Italian  style  (from  1624),  largely  secular,  but  including  sa- 
cred songs  by  Rist  and  a quantity  of  motets  and  madrigals  (in  MS.). 

Less  important,  perhaps,  though  also  productive,  were  Melchior  Vulpius 
(d.  1615),  from  1602  cantor  at  Weimar,  with  varied  works  (from  1602),  includ- 
ing a Passion  (1613),  chorales  and  settings  of  the  Gospel  pericopes ; Johann 
Stobseus  (d.  1646),  a pupil  of  Eccard,  cantor  at  Konigsberg  from  1602,  with 
some  finely  wrought  motets  (from  1624)  and  festal  choral  works ; Michael 
Altenburg  (d.  1640),  pastor  at  Erfurt  from  1608,  with  a Passion  (1608)  and 
choir-pieces  (1613-21),  often  many-voiced;  Johann  Schop  (d.  c.  1665),  an 
accomplished  player  on  the  violin,  lute  and  wind  instruments,  who  was  at  the 
Danish  court  from  1618  and  town-musician  at  Hamburg  from  1621,  a composer 


204 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


(from  1630)  of  melodious  church  music,  including  noted  settings  of  religious 
poems  (especially  by  Rist),  besides  dances  and  other  instrumental  pieces  ; and 
Johann  Dilliger  (d.  1647),  from  1619  cantor  at  Wittenberg  and  from  1625  at 
Coburg,  with  abundant  works  in  many  forms  (from  1620).  Later  writers  will 
be  grouped  under  Schiitz. 

96.  Schiitz  and  the  Oratorio  Style. — While  the  new  impetus  in 
German  music  in  the  17th  century  was  certainly  not  due  to  the 
genius  of  any  one  man,  yet  Schiitz  stands  out  as  a typical  and 
dominating  figure.  Besides  equaling  or  excelling  his  contem- 
poraries at  various  points,  he  had  something  of  that  prevision  as 
to  musical  progress  that  marked  his  greater  successor  Bach  just 
a century  later.  He  was  familiar  with  Italy  and  plainly  influ- 
enced by  Venetian  models,  especially  as  to  polychoric  forms, 
richness  of  effect  and  a tendency  to  dramatic  methods.  Yet 
the  tone  of  his  work  is  essentially  German  as  well  in  its  serious- 
ness and  solidity.  With  him  begins  a style  that  is  intensely  re- 
ligious without  having  a necessary  connection  with  the  usual 
church  services.  At  intervals  through  his  life  he  produced 
works  in  which  may  be  seen  the  outlines  of  the  German  oratorio 
— a form  that  is  not  a sacred  opera,  but  a religious  concert- 
drama,  suitable  either  for  the  church  or  elsewhere. 

Besides  the  general  use  of  recitative  and  other  solo  melodies,  as  in  all 
works  of  the  dramatic  species,  Schiitz  emphasized  the  function  of  Narrators 
in  addition  to  the  personages  in  action,  also  of  interjected  chorales  (as  it 
were,  the  voice  of  the  audience),  and  also  of  noble  choruses,  declamatory, 
reflective  or  contrapuntal.  Often,  too,  he  made  the  instrumentation  a 
strong  accessory. 

The  earlier  works  of  this  class  had  been  all  Passions  or  the  like,  based 
properly  upon  the  narratives  in  the  Gospels,  but  sometimes  upon  chapters 
like  Isaiah  liii.  — the  whole  built  out  poetically  in  various  ways. 

Heinrich  Schiitz  (d.  1672)  was  born  in  1585  at  Kostritz  (Thuringia),  was  a 
choirboy  at  Cassel  and  a law-student  at  the  University  of  Marburg.  In  1609  he 
was  sent  to  Venice  by  the  musical  Landgrave  Moritz  to  study  under  Giovanni 
Gabrieli,  returning  in  1613  to  be  court-organist  at  Cassel.  From  1617  (really 
from  1615)  till  his  death  55  years  later  he  was  electoral  choirmaster  at  Dresden, 
his  long  service  being  broken,  especially  during  the  Thirty  Years1  War,  by 
several  trips  to  Italy  and  by  three  extended  visits  to  Copenhagen  to  act  as  court- 
conductor.  His  life  is  said  to  have  been  beset  by  many  domestic  bereave- 
ments, from  which  artistic  production  was  his  chosen  recourse.  His  striking 
success  with  the  Dresden  Chapel  and  his  gifts  as  a composer  brought  him 
fame  and  many  accomplished  pupils.  (His  official  stipend,  however,  was 
never  equal  to  that  of  Italians  in  the  court  employ.)  His  eminence  has 
lately  been  recognized  afresh,  and  his  works  are  now  accessible  in  a great 


SCHUTZ  AND  THE  ORATORIO  STYLE 


205 


standard  edition  (1885-94).  They  are  numerous  and  extensive,  all  being 
sacred  except  some  early  madrigals  (1611),  various  pieces  for  court  festivities, 
and  the  singspiel  Dafne  (1627,  but 
score  lost),  often  called  the  first  Ger- 
man opera.  To  the  list  in  the  oratorio 
style  belong  the  Resurrection  (1623), 
the  Seven  Words  (1645)  and  the  four 
Passions,  to  which  may  be  added  the 
Psalms  (1619)  and  the  Syinphonice 
sacrce  (motets,  1629-50),  in  which  the 
treatment  of  choruses  often  rises  to 
concert  grandeur. 

From  about  1650  there  was  a 
striking  increase  in  originality 
in  all  German  music,  affecting 
both  sacred  and  secular  writing. 

In  the  vocal  field  a notable  fea- 
ture was  the  attention  to  solos 
more  or  less  of  the  folk-song 
pattern,  which,  however,  as  dramatic  impulses  became  stronger, 
tended  to  give  way  before  the  concertistic  aria.  The  use  of 
instruments  in  combination  was  free  and  often  ingenious,  espe- 
cially as  concerns  the  handling  of  certain  wind  instruments  (like 
krummhorner  and  zinkeri).  Almost  all  leading  composers  began 
to  pay  attention  to  dances  of  several  sorts  as  offering  scope  for  ar- 
tistic development.  All  this  new  life  had  important  historic  rela- 
tions to  the  work  of  the  next  century.  The  achievements,  then, 
of  the  greater  Bachs  rested  upon  extensive  earlier  experiments. 

Leading  names  among  the  many  in  the  period  following  Schiitz  are 
these : — 

Heinrich  Albert  (d.  1651),  Schiitz’  nephew  and  early  pupil,  who,  though 
trained  for  the  law,  was  from  1630  cathedral-organist  at  Konigsberg.  Him- 
self a good  poet,  he  became  famous  as  one  of  the  first  real  song-composers 
(8  collections,  1638-50,  besides  other  works),  and  is  often  called  the  father 
of  the  German  ‘ Lied.’ 

Andreas  Hammerschmidt  (d.  1675),  a Bohemian,  was  from  1635  organist 
at  Freiberg  (Saxony)  and  from  1639  at  Zittau.  His  works  (from  1639)  range 
from  dances  and  other  instrumental  pieces  to  many-voice  masses,  and  in- 
clude interesting  melodic  and  concerted  effects  as  well  as  some  good  counter- 
point. Specially  noted  are  his  Dialogues  between  God  and  a Believing  Soul 
(part-songs,  1645). 

Johann  Rosenmiiller  (d.  1684),  educated  at  Leipsic  and  teacher  in  the 
Thomasschule  there  in  1642-55,  under  a charge  of  immorality  fled  thence  to 


The  Genealogy  of  the  Bachs 


206 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


a 

a — cs  £ 

X > 


c 

<0  ^ — 

X 


A 

u 

' C — 


a 


_co 


-5^  o 

-'S  S 

_ jo  u 
o 


ro  W 


-N  !-J 1 

CO 


O fci 
ro  1 — » 


_ On  U 


£ 


*>  w 


VO  CO 
M 1 — > 


w •— > 


N U 

~ o 


-2  w. 


Ov  fc, 

"t  o 


-00  < 
^00 


10  F9 
^ o 


_ w 


ro  £< 


N < 

"T  •— > 


- x 

n-  £L 


c L> 

^ •— > 


Ov  M 
ro  1 — > 


00 

- ro  H 


[ 


63 

ro  1—* 


vO  >-J 

ro  1 — » 


N U 
M . 


-OvU—j 


P U 


M 1-4 


K-l 

1-1  EL 

*— ( M i 


Wilhelm 


THE  BACH  FAMILY 


207 


Hamburg  and  Venice.  In  some  way  cleared,  he  became  ducal  choirmaster 
at  Wolfenbiittel  in  1667.  His  published  works  (from  1645)  were  mostly 
dances,  with  some  motets  (more  in  MS.),  and  were  valued  at  the  time  for 
their  originality. 

Johann  Rudolph  Ahle  (d.  1673),  trained  at  Gottingen  and  Erfurt,  was  from 
1646  cantor  at  Erfurt  and  from  1654  at  Miihlhausen.  Besides  text-books,  he 
wrote  choir  music  of  moderate  value  (from  1647),  with  about  120  religious 
songs  or  arias,  paralleling  Albert’s  secular  songs.  His  son,  Johann  Georg  Ahle 
(d.  1706),  succeeded  him  at  Miihlhausen,  and  was  in  turn  followed  by  J.  S. 
Bach.  His  many  works  (from  1671)  were  like  his  father’s,  but  advanced  to 
the  aria  as  distinct  from  the  song.  He  was  named  poet-laureate  by  the  Em- 
peror in  1680. 

Samuel  Bockshorn  (d.  1665),  after  teaching  at  Pressburg  and  Nuremberg, 
was  from  1657  court-choirmaster  at  Stuttgart,  where  his  strictness  involved 
him  in  some  difficulties.  Besides  both  Latin  and  German  church  music  (from 
1655)  and  a kind  of  Passion  (1660),  he  also  wrote  part-songs  and  dances. 

Christoph  Bernhard  (d.  1692),  helped  by  generous  friends  to  his  education 
under  Schiitz  and  in  Italy,  was  second  choirmaster  at  Dresden  from  1655,  be- 
came in  1664  cantor  at  Hamburg,  and  returned  to  Dresden  in  1674  as  Schiitz’ 
successor.  Though  an  able  contrapuntist,  he  left  but  few  works  (1665-7  and 
in  MS.). 

Wolfgang  Karl  Briegel  (d.  1712),  from  1650  cantor  at  Gotha  and  from  1671 
choirmaster  at  Darmstadt,  was  very  prolific  (at  least  25  large  books,  1652-1709), 
chiefly  in  religious  works,  using  all  forms  with  a strong  leaning  to  concert 
styles.  His  instrumental  accompaniments  were  also  good. 

Johann  Theile  (d.  1724),  probably  a pupil  of  Schiitz,  had  a restless  career 
at  Stettin,  Liibeck,  Gottorp,  Hamburg,  Wolfenbiittel,  Merseburg  and  Naum- 
burg.  His  works  included,  besides  singspiele  at  Hamburg,  a Passion  (1673), 
a Christmas  oratorio  (1681),  over  20  masses,  other  sacred  works,  and  a set 
of  instrumental  pieces,  all  showing  immense  skill  in  counterpoint.  He  had 
many  able  pupils  and  issued  text-books. 

97.  The  Bach  Family. — Throughout  the  17th  century  the 
Bachs  of  Thuringia  steadily  became  more  notable  as  musicians. 
Although  always  of  humble  station  and  often  sufferers  from  the 
ravages  of  war,  they  thriftily  made  their  way,  lived  earnest  and 
upright  lives,  and  so  generally  cultivated  music  that  in  some 
places  town-musicians  were  actually  called  “ the  Bachs.” 

As  they  multiplied  and  won  place  as  singers,  players,  town-musicians, 
organists  and  cantors,  their  intense  family  feeling  united  them  in  a sort 
of  Bach  guild.  Their  chief  headquarters  were  Eisenach,  Arnstadt  or 
Erfurt  (besides  a collateral  branch  at  Meiningen),  and  they  finally 
established  the  custom  of  an  annual  family  reunion  at  one  of  these 
largely  devoted  to  music. 

Most  of  them  emphasized  sacred  composition — for  choir  or 
organ  — but  almost ' all  worked  freely  in  secular  forms  as  well, 


208 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


especially  for  instruments.  Until  far  into  the  1 8th  century, 
none  of  them  enjoyed  opportunities  for  travel  or  study  at  musi- 
cal centres  outside  their  own  region,  but  their  enterprise  and 
intuition  enabled  them  to  keep  well  abreast  of  progress  in  their 
art.  It  is  hard  to  describe  the  massive  value  of  their  cumula- 
tive influence,  not  only  in  Saxony  and  its  neighborhood,  but  far 
beyond.  Certainly  no  family  of  artists  in  any  field  can  be 
named  that  rivals  them,  if,  indeed,  there  be  any  equal  instance 
of  hereditary  genius  on  record.  Their  varied  activity  in  the 
later  17th  century  led  worthily  toward  their  supereminent  re- 
nown in  the  18th  in  the  careers  of  Johann  Sebastian  Bach  and 
his  talented  sons. 

During  the  three  centuries  from  1550  to  1850  perhaps  400  Bachs  are 
known.  Of  these  about  60  occupied  positions  of  some  official  importance. 
The  full  genealogy  is  intricate,  being  complicated  by  the  intermarriage  of 
cousins.  In  general,  it  is  to  be  noted  that  in  the  third  generation  two 
great  branches  separate,  the  first  of  which  splits  into  three  — giving  four 
principal  lines.  For  reference,  the  names  are  tabulated  on  page  206,  each 
person  being  marked  by  his  initials. 


I.  1.  Hans  of  Wechmar. 

II.  2.  Veit  (d.  1619). 

III.  3.  Hans ‘the  Player1 * * 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 * 12  (d.  1626). 

4.  Lips  (d.  1620),  presumably 

his  brother. 

IV.  Sons  of  Hans  (3)  — 

5.  Johann  of  Erfurt  (d.  1673). 

6.  Christoph  of  Erfurt  and  Arn- 

stadt  (d.  1661). 

7.  Heinrich  of  Arnstadt  (d. 

1692). 

Son  of  Lifs  (4)  — 

8.  Wendel  of  Gotha  (d.  1682). 
V.  Sons  of  Johann  (f)  — 

9.  Joh.  Christian  of  Erfurt  and 

Eisenach  (d.  1682?). 

10.  Joh.  Egidius  of  Erfurt  (d. 
1717). 

ir.  Joh.  Nikolaus  of  Erfurt  (d. 
1682). 

Sons  of  Christoph  (6)  — 

12.  Georg  Christoph  of  Schwein- 
furt  (d.  1697). 


13.  Joh.  Ambrosius  of  Eisenach 

(d.  1695). 

14.  Joh.  Christoph  of  Arnstadt 

(d.  1694). 

Sons  of  Heinrich  (7)  — 

15.  Joh.  Christoph  of  Eisenach 

(d.  1703). 

16.  Juh.  Michael  of  Gehren  (d. 

1694b 

17.  Joh.  GUnther  of  Arnstadt  (d. 

1683). 

Son  of  Wendel  (8)  — 

18.  Jakob  of  Ruhla  (d.  1718). 
VI.  Sons  of  Joh.  Christian  (9)  — 

19.  Joh.  Jakob  of  Eisenach  (d. 

1692). 

20.  Joh.  Christoph  of  Gehren  (d. 

1727). 

Sons  of  Joh.  Egidius  (10)  — 

21.  Joh.  Bernhard  of  Eisenach 

(d.  1749)- 

22.  Joh.  Christoph  of  Erfurt  (d. 

after  1735). 


THE  BACH  FAMILY 


209 


Son  of  Georg  Christoph  (12)  — 

23.  Joh.  Valentin  of  Schweinfurt 

(d.  1720). 

Sons  of  Joh.  Ambrosius  (13)  — 

24.  Joh.  Christoph  of  Ohrdruf 

(d.  1721). 

25.  Joh.  Jakob  of  Stockholm  (d. 

1722). 

26.  Joh.  Sebastian  of  Leipsic  (d. 

1750). 

Son  of  Joh.  Christoph  (14)  — 

27.  Joh.  Ernst  of  Arnstadt  (d. 

1739)* 

Sons  of  Joh.  Christoph  (15)  — 

28.  Joh.  Nikolaus  of  Jena  (d. 

1753)- 

29.  Joh.  Christoph  of  Erfurt  and 

England. 

30.  Joh.  Friedrich  of  Miihlhausen. 

31.  Joh.  Michael. 

Sons  of  Jakob  (18)  — 

32.  Joh.  Ludwig  of  Meiningen 

(d.  1741). 

33.  Nikolaus  Ephraim  of  Gan- 

dersheim. 

34.  Georg  Michael  (d.  1771). 
VII.  Son  of  Joh.  Bertihard  (21)  — 

35.  Joh.  Ernst  of  Weimar  (d. 

1777)- 

Sons  of  Joh.  Valentin  (23)  — 

36.  Joh.  Lorenz  of  Lahm  (d. 

■773)- 

37.  Joh.  Elias  of  Schweinfurt 

(d. 1755)- 


Sonsofjoh.  Christoph  (24)  — 

38.  Tobias  Friedrich  of  Utt- 

stadt. 

39.  Joh.  Bernhard  of  Ohrdruf 

(d.  1744). 

40.  Joh.  Christoph  of  Ohrdruf. 

41 . Joh.  Heinrich  of  Oehringen. 

42.  Joh.  Andreas. 

Sons  of  Joh.  Sebastian  (26)  — 

43.  Wilhelm  Friedemann  of 

Halle  (d.  1784). 

44.  Karl  Philipp  Emanuel  of 

Berlin  and  Hamburg  (d. 
1788). 

45.  Joh.  Gottfried  Bernhard  of 

Miihlhausen  (d.  1739). 

46.  Joh.  Christoph  Friedrich  of 

Btickeburg  (d.  1795). 

47.  Joh.  Christian  of  Milan  and 

London  (d.  1782). 

Sons  of  Joh.  Ludwig  (32)  — 

48.  Samuel  Anton  of  Meiningen 

(d.  1781). 

49.  Gottlieb  Friedrich  of  Mei- 

ningen (d.  1785). 

Son  of  Georg  Michael  (34)  — 

50.  Joh.  Christian  of  Halle  (d. 

1814). 

VIII.  Sou  of  Joh.  Chr.  Friedrich 
(46)  — 

51.  Wilhelm  of  Berlin  (d.  1846). 
Son  of  Joh.  Christian  (50)  — 

52.  Joh.  Philipp  of  Meiningen 

(d.  1846). 


Of  the  15-20  names  belonging  to  the  17th  century  the  greatest  were  the 
two  sons  of  Heinrich  [7]  : — 

Johann  Christoph  Bach  [15]  (d.  1703)  was  born  at  Arnstadt  in  1642  and 
most  carefully  trained  by  his  father  (who  was  organist  there  for  over  50  years). 
From  1665  he  was  for  38  years  town-organist  at  Eisenach.  He  was  probably 
the  most  original  of  the  motettists  of  the  time,  as  well  as  one  of  the  ablest 
organists,  having  an  unusual  instinct  for  form  and  great  facility  in  handling 
many  voices  and  in  organ  extemporization.  He  was  not  in  sympathy  with  the 
prevalent  dramatic  styles,  though  one  of  his  motets  for  double  chorus  and 
orchestra  belongs  remotely  to  the  oratorio  class.  He  was  simple,  earnest  and 
painstaking,  and  won  universal  respect  as  man  and  artist.  He  educated  his 


p 


210 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


four  sons,  and  possibly  slightly  influenced  Johann  Sebastian,  his  cousin’s  son, 
who  lived  at  Eisenach  till  his  tenth  year. 

Johann  Michael  Bach  [16]  (d.  1694),  born  at  Arnstadtin  1648,  was  similarly 
trained.  In  1673  he  became  organist  at  Gehren,  remaining  till  his  death. 
His  genius  resembled  his  brother’s,  especially  as  regards  invention,  though  he 
was  less  gifted  in  form.  His  more  numerous  motets  and  organ-pieces  are  not 
only  learned,  but  rich  in  ideas  and  feeling.  He  was  one  of  the  earliest  of  the 
family  to  take  up  instrument-making.  Of  his  five  daughters,  the  youngest, 
Maria  Barbara  (d.  1720),  became  the  first  wife  of  Johann  Sebastian  in  1707, 
so  that  her  four  surviving  children,  including  three  sons,  were  descended  from 
both  the  second  and  the  third  lines  of  the  great  family. 

Mention  should  also  be  made  of  the  two  sons  of  Christoph  [6]  : Johann 
Ambrosius  Bach  [13]  (d.  1695)  and  Johann  Christoph  Bach  [14]  (d.  1693), 
who  were  twins  (b.  1645)  and  almost  indistinguishable.  Ambrosius  was  a 
good  violinist,  in  request  at  Erfurt  from  1667  and  at  Eisenach  from  1671. 
Johann  Sebastian  was  the  last  of  his  eight  children.  Christoph  was  court- 
violinist  and  town-piper  at  Arnstadt  from  1671,  living  a curiously  troubled 
life.  Of  his  five  children,  Johann  Ernst  [27]  (d.  1739),  though  of  but 
average  talent,  was  Johann  Sebastian’s  successor  as  organist  at  Arnstadt 
in  1707. 

98.  In  France,  Spain  and  Portugal.  — Although  church  music 
was  naturally  cultivated  in  every  cathedral  and  principal  church 
in  France,  yet  the  trend  of  musical  interest  under  both  Louis 
XIII.  and  Louis  XIV.  was  so  strong  in  other  directions  that 
few  masters  of  sacred  music  appeared.  The  tendency  was  to 
go  on  using  old  works  or  simply  adopt  Italian  works  as  they 
came  out. 

Two  composers,  however,  may  be  mentioned  : — 

Arthur  AuxCousteaux  (d.  1656),  teacher  at  St.  Quentin  and  later  in  the 
Royal  Chapel,  was  a somewhat  prolific  writer  of  masses,  motets,  psalms  and 
part-songs  (from  1631)  in  the  Italian  style. 

Michel  Richard  Lalande  (d.  1726)  won  notice  as  a choirboy  at  Paris  and 
secured  instruction  in  playing  various  instruments.  Developing  special  talent 
for  the  organ,  from  about  1675  he  served  several  churches,  would  have  been 
made  royal  organist  except  for  his  youth,  became  teacher  in  the  king’s  house- 
hold, and  from  1683  was  one  of  the  royal  superintendents  of  music.  He  was 
the  strongest  French  church  composer  of  the  time  (fine  motets,  1695-1712), 
besides  writing  many  ballets  (from  1678). 

The  same  remarks  apply  to  Spain  at  this  period  so  far  as 
lack  of  originality  is  concerned,  though  there  was  no  other  mu- 
sical interest  of  importance.  It  should  be  said,  however,  that 
from  the  17th  century  a special  form  of  motet,  the  * vilhancico,’ 
arose  in  both  Spain  and  Portugal,  in  which  choral  opening  and 


SPANISH  AND  PORTUGUESE  CHURCH  MUSIC 


21 1 


closing  movements  were  combined  with  a middle  movement  for 
a solo  voice  (analogous  to  many  English  anthems). 

Almost  all  Spanish  works  of  this  period  are  unpublished,  the  MSS.  being 
widely  scattered.  Little  is  therefore  known  generally  of  their  value.  Appar- 
ently notable  composers  were  few.  Bare  mention  may  be  made  of  Sebastiano 
Aguilera  de  Heredia,  choirmaster  at  Saragossa  early  in  the  century,  with  su- 
perior magnificats  (1618)  still  in  use;  Carlos  Patino  (d.  1683),  choirmaster 
at  Madrid  from  perhaps  1633,  with  many  works,  mostly  polychoric,  that  are 
still  highly  regarded;  and  Juan  Perez  Roldan  (d.  1722),  Patino’s  successor, 
also  with  many  works  (in  MS.). 

Portugal,  on  the  other  hand,  enjoyed  in  the  17th  century  a 
time  of  decided  musical  activity,  beginning  during  the  Spanish 
domination  (from  1580),  but  reaching  its  height  after  indepen- 
dence was  recovered  in  1640.  From  that  time  to  this  the  mon- 
archy has  been  in  the  hands  of  the  House  of  Bragar^a,  of  which 
the  first  king,  Joao  IV.,  was  an  eager  and  accomplished  musician 
(“more  musician  than  king,”  says  Von  Waxel).  Under  him 
church  music  was  cultivated  with  assiduity,  large  numbers  of 
works  for  the  Catholic  service  were  produced,  and  talented 
composers  were  encouraged  — none  of  them  exerting  notable 
influence  on  general  progress,  but  worthy  of  remembrance 
nevertheless. 

Joao  IV.  (d.  1656),  besides  writing  theoretical  treatises  (1649-54),  col- 
lected an  enormous  musical  library,  probably  the  best  in  its  day,  including 
rare  MSS.  from  all  countries,  besides  a comprehensive  collection  of  Spanish 
and  Portuguese  works  up  to  that  time.  Of  this  a partial  catalogue  was  pre- 
pared. Almost  exactly  a century  later  (1755)  this  library  was  totally  de- 
stroyed in  the  great  earthquake  at  Lisbon.  This  catastrophe  doubtless  wiped 
out  hundreds  of  works  of  which  no  other  copies  now  exist,  and  rendered  a 
thorough  survey  of  Portuguese  music  impossible. 

Of  some  scores  of  composers  whose  names  are  known  and  whose  works  lie 
hidden  in  various  cathedral  archives,  the  following  are  important : — 

Duarte  Lobo  (d.  1643),  a pupil  of  the  famous  music-school  of  Manoel  Mendes 
(d.  1605)  at  Evora,  was  from  about  1594  choirmaster  at  Lisbon.  He  was  an 
active  teacher,  with  important  work  (1602-39)  in  the  intricate  style  of  Be- 
nevoli. 

Manoel  Cardoso  (d.  1650),  also  trained  at  Evora,  was  choirmaster  there  and 
from  1628  at  the  Carmelite  monastery  in  Lisbon.  His  works  (1613-48)  in- 
clude three  collections  of  masses. 

Joao  Lourengo  Rebello  (d.  1661)  was  the  most  eminent  composer  in  the 
middle  of  the  century.  He  left  many  works  for  large  numbers  of  voices,  also 
madrigals.  He  was  the  teacher  of  Joao  IV. 

Felipe  da  Magalhaes  studied  at  Evora  and  was  court-choirmaster  at  Lisbon 
and  a good  teacher  (works,  1635-91). 


212 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


Many  other  names  perhaps  equally  deserve  record,  such  as  Felipe  da  Cruz, 
twice  choirmaster  at  Lisbon ; Andre  da  Costa  (d.  1685),  singer  in  the  Royal 
Chapel;  and  Antonio  Marques  Lesbio  (d.  1709),  royal  choirmaster  at  Madrid 
from  1698  (works,  1660-1708). 

99.  In  England.  — English  church  music  in  this  century  passed 
through  varied  vicissitudes.  U nder  J ames  I.  ( 1 603-2 5 ) the  heavy 
harmonic  style  was  replaced  for  a time  by  a return  to  the  old 
counterpoint,  the  ablest  composer  being  Orlando  Gibbons.  But 
with  the  overpressure  of  prelatical  authority  after  1630  came  the 
Puritan  reaction  and  the  Civil  War,  during  which  a fanatical  on- 
slaught was  made  on  choirs,  organs  and  all  the  apparatus  of 
‘curious  music/  not  because  it  was  music,  but  because  associated 
with  a hated  system  (see  sec.  88).  This  crusade  made  a gap  in 
sacred  music  till  the  Restoration  in  1660,  when  cathedral  choirs 
and  the  Chapel  Royal  were  reinstated.  Services  and  anthems 
now  began  to  adopt  F'rench  and  Italian  features,  such  as  dra- 
matic solos  and  generally  homophonic  treatment.'  The  wide- 
spread lack  of  interest  in  religion  reduced  the  popular  power  of 
all  sacred  music,  though  the  genius  of  Humphrey  and  Purcell 
was  respected. 

Among  the  madrigalists  (see  sec.  69)  were  many  good  church  composers, 
like  Morley,  Weelkes,  Este,  Ravenscroft  and  0.  Gibbons.  With  them  are  to 
be  named  Nathaniel  Giles  (d.  1633),  from  1597  in  the  Chapel  Royal ; Thomas 
Tomkins  (d.  1656),  organist  at  Worcester;  John  Amner  (d.  1641),  from 
1610  organist  at  Ely  ; Martin  Pearson  (d.  1650),  choirmaster  at  St.  Paul’s  from 
1604;  John  Milton  (d.  1647),  the  father  of  the  poet;  and  Adrian  Batten 
(d.  1637),  from  1614  singer  at  Westminster  and  from  1624  organist  at  St.  Paul's. 

Many  musicians  who  were  prominent  after  1660  began  their  activity  before 
the  Civil  War,  like  William  Child  (d.  1697),  organist  at  Windsor  from  1636 
and  in  the  Chapel  from  1660  ; Benjamin  Rogers  (d.  1698),  from  1639  at  Dub- 
lin, from  1641  at  Windsor,  and  from  1664  at  Magdalen  College,  Oxford;  and 
Christopher  Gibbons  (d.  1676),  son  of  Orlando  and  pupil  of  Edward,  from  1638 
organist  at  Winchester  and  from  1660  of  the  Chapel,  as  well  as  of  West- 
minster in  1660-5.  During  the  political  turmoils,  what  interest  there  was  in 
church  music  centred  at  Oxford  and  Cambridge. 

Of  the  many  church  composers  after  1660,  besides  Humphrey  and  Henry 
Purcell  (see  sec.  89),  may  be  noted  Henry  Cooke  (d.  1672),  the  famous  Master 
of  the  Chapel  Royal  from  1660;  Matthew  Locke  (d.  1677),  royal  composer 
from  1661  and  later  in  the  service  of  Queen  Catherine;  Michael  Wise  (d. 
1687),  organist  at  Salisbury  from  1668  and  in  the  Chapel  from  1676  — one  of 
the  best  of  the  series  ; John  Blow  (d.  1708),  organist  at  Westminster  in  1669- 
8c  and  from  1695,  preceding  and  following  Purcell,  besides  being  organist  to 
the  Chapel  from  1674  and  royal  composer  from  1699,  an  able  player  and  a 


ENGLISH  CHURCH  MUSIC 


213 


prolific  writer  of  the  ornate  order;  Thomas  Tudway  (d.  1730),  from  1670  or- 
ganist at  King’s  College,  Cambridge,  and  from  1704  Professor  of  Music; 
William  Turner  (d.  1740),  in  the  Chapel  Royal  all  his  life;  Daniel  Purcell 
(d.  1717),  from  1688  organist  at  Magdalen  College,  Oxford,  and  after  1695  in 
London,  who  wrote  dramas  and  odes  as  well  as  anthems ; Henry  Aldrich  (d. 
1710),  dean  of  Christ  Church,  Oxford,  from  1689,  a versatile  scholar,  architect 
and  musician,  whose  library  of  music  was  the  finest  outside  the  British 
Museum  ; and  Jeremiah  Clarke  (d.  1707,  suicide),  organist  at  Winchester  from 
1692,  in  the  Chapel  Royal  from  1700  and  its  organist  from  1704.  Several 
other  composers  of  services  and  anthems  that  belong  to  the  next  century  be- 
gan active  work  before  1700. 

Among  the  important  collections  of  church  music  were  those  of  Barnard 
(1641),  Clifford  (1661,  ’63),  and  Tudway  (MS.,  about  1715-20). 


Fig.  58.  — German  Positive  Organ  (17th  century). 


CHAPTER  XIII 


THE  ORGAN  STYLE 

100.  The  Rising  Importance  of  Instruments.  — Although  in  all 
stages  of  musical  progress  instruments  are  interesting,  in  the 
formal  evolution  of  the  art  they  were  long  remitted  to  a strictly 
subordinate  place,  vocal  music  supplying  the  ideal  norms  of  pro- 
cedure. All  the  fundamental  rules  of  composition  were  first  laid 
down  on  vocal  lines,  all  the  earlier  art-forms  were  vocal,  and  all 
the  early  masters  became  dominant  because  successful  with  vo- 
cal works.  Experiments  with  instruments  were  made  at  first 
either  to  imitate  vocal  effects  or  for  their  mere  support  or  inci- 
dental decoration.  The  entire  theory  and  practice  of  artistic 
music  up  to  the  second  half  of  the  16th  century  was  vocal  in 
basis  and  essence.  As  the  17th  century  approached,  how- 
ever, and  much  more  as  it  proceeded,  a new  tendency  asserted 
itself.  Without  giving  up  emphasis  upon  the  voice  as  the  pri- 
mary musical  implement,  it  was  perceived  how  advantageously 
mechanical  implements  might  also  be  used  by  themselves  and 
in  ways  essentially  unvocal.  In  consequence,  instrumental  music 
now  shook  itself  clear  and  set  out  upon  a vigorous  development 
that  had  marvelous  later  consequences. 

The  new  tendency  had  many  causes.  Perhaps  chief  of  these  was  the 
mighty  swing  of  interest  from  sacred  to  intensely  secular  music,  with  the  ex- 
altation of  objective  forms  over  subjective,  and  of  whatever  could  excite 
and  pique  attention  by  its  impact  upon  the  listener  rather  than  merely  give 
outlet  for  the  feeling  of  the  composer  or  performer.  But  combined  with 
this  was  the  stimulus  derived  from  the  technical  improvement  of  certain 
particular  instruments.  The  taste  of  the  time  called  for  more  impressive 
effects  and  more  elaborate  implements,  and  these  implements  and  their 
effects  in  turn  reacted  powerfully  upon  taste. 

The  two  classes  of  instruments  that  took  the  lead  were  those 
with  a keyboard,  especially  the  organ,  and  those  sounded  by  a 
bow,  that  is,  the  entire  viol  family.  The  former  were  prominent 
because  capable  of  concerted,  polyphonic  and  massive  effects, 
the  latter  because  capable  of  the  finest  solo  effects  and  because, 

214 


THE  ORGAN  KEYBOARD 


215 


when  combined,  they  constitute  the  most  flexible  and  expres- 
sive instrumental  chorus  — the  natural  nucleus  of  the  orchestra. 
Though  notable  achievements  with  both  classes  were  delayed  till 
later,  the  17th  century  is  remembered  for  its  persistent  endeav- 
ors to  perfect  them  and  to  discover  styles  appropriate  to  them. 

101.  The  Keyboard. — The  genesis  of  the  modern  keyboard  can- 
not be  fully  traced.  Its  essential  mechanical  principle  (that  of 
the  lever)  has  always  been  obvious,  but  its  special  adaptation  to 
the  hand  and  to  the  production  of  tone  must  have  been  gradually 
worked  out.  By  the  16th  century  the  keyboard  as  now  known 
had  become  well  established,  though  some  niceties  of  measure- 
ment and  disposition  were  not  fully  settled. 

In  modern  usage  13  (white)  keys  occupy  the  lateral  space  of  one  foot,  so 
that  an  octave  is  about  6}  in.  wide.  The  white  keys  are  f in.  wide  on 
top,  and  the  black  keys  f in.,  the  latter  being  about  2 in.  behind  the 
former  and  about  | in.  higher.  The  dip  of  all  is  usually  about  f in. 
All  these  details  are  the  result  of  centuries  of  experiment  (see  sec.  32). 

The  peculiar  disposition  of  the  longer  and  shorter  keys  — the 
latter  interspersed  among  the  former  in  twos  and  threes 
alternately  — is  really  arbitrary,  but  it  clearly  records  a 
stage  in  the  evolution  of  musical  theory  to  which  the  staff- 
notation  is  also  accommodated.  Although  both  keyboard 
and  notation  are  mediaeval,  they  are  so  imbedded  in  musical 
praxis  and  terminology  that  apparently  no  more  scientific  sub- 
stitutes are  likely  to  come  into  general  use. 

So  long  as  the  mediaeval  modes  were  used  in  their  purity,  only  what  are 
now  white  keys  were  required.  The  need  of  the  chromatic  semitones 
probably  arose  both  from  the  desire  to  transpose  diatonic  melodies  and 
from  the  growing  use  of  musica  ficta , with  its  virtual  acceptance  of  what 
is  now  called  modulation.  Possibly  the  semitones  came  in  gradually  in 
some  such  order  as  this  — B^,  F#,  C#,  Et?,  G#.  Their  tuning  offered  a 
problem  not  well  solved  till  the  18th  century.  To  avoid  harshness,  al- 
ternative semitones  were  sometimes  provided,  as  both  G#  and  At?  between 
G and  A.  The  diatonic  keys  were  often  colored  black  and  the  semitones 
white  — the  reverse  of  present-day  practice.  Semitones  were  at  first 
not  introduced  throughout,  but  were  confined  to  the  middle  octaves. 

The  length  or  compass  of  the  keyboard  has  varied  greatly. 
In  early  organs  simply  a single  octave  or  an  octave  and  a half 
was  not  uncommon,  since  only  this  limited  range  was  needed  to 
carry  Plain-Song  melodies.  But  as  the  notion  of  harmony  and 


2l6 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


Fig.  59.  — Italian 
Clavichord  (1537). 


Fig.  62.  — Italian 
Portative  Organ 
(17th  century?). 


Fig.  60.  — German 
Regal  (16th  century). 


Fig.  61.  — Italian  Virginal  or  Small 
Spinet  (17th  century). 


THE  ORGAN  AND  THE  ORGAN  STYLE 


217 


the  desire  for  concerted  effects  grew,  the  compass  was  gradually 
stretched  to  three  or  four  octaves  or  even  more. 

In  most  early  organs,  to  avoid  expense,  the  lowest  octave  was  usually 
* short,1  that  is,  not  only  without  all  of  the  semitones  (or  even  without 
some  of  the  diatonic  keys),  but  with  the  keys  disposed  in  some  peculiar 
order  so  as  to  bring  them  close  together.  This  was  specially  common  in 
pedal  keyboards. 

The  original  application  of  the  keyboard  was  probably  to  the 
organ  proper.  But  it  was  early  extended  to  small  portative 
organs  or  ‘ regals,’  which  were  very  popular  through  the  later 
Middle  Ages  ; and  it  was  on  such  domestic  instruments  that  the 
modern  measurements  of  the  keys  became  established.  From 
at  least  the  14th  century  it  was  also  applied  to  the  monochord, 
producing  the  rudimentary  clavichord,  and  to  some  form  of  harp 
or  lyre,  producing  the  spinet,  virginal  and  harpsichord.  Finally, 
as  the  17th  century  closed,  it  was  applied  to  the  dulcimer,  pro- 
ducing the  first  form  of  the  pianoforte.  When  all  the  artistic  * 
consequences  of  these  applications  are  considered,  the  keyboard 
is  seen  to  be  most  interestingly  related  to  musical  progress  (see 
sec.  135).  • 

102.  The  Organ.  — Among  mediaeval  instruments  the  organ 
was  conspicuous  because  used  in  church  services.  At  least  as 
early  as  the  13th  century  it  appeared  in  several  forms  or  sizes. 
The  largest  were  those  permanently  set  up  in  churches  as  part  of 
their  fixed  furniture.  Next  came  the  ‘positives,’  which  were  of 
moderate  size  and  could  occasionally  be  moved  as  convenience 
required.  Next  were  the  * portatives,’  which  were  small  enough 
to  be  carried  about  in  processions  or  applied  to  purely  private 
and  secular  entertainment.  Finally,  there  were  still  smaller 
forms,  often  called  ‘ regals,’  which  were  made  so  as  to  fold  to- 
gether, often  in  the  shape  of  a large  book  (hence  often  called 
‘ Bible  regals  ’).  It  is  natural  to  think  of  the  larger  forms 
as  connected  with  the  historic  importance  of  the  organ,  but 
the  portatives  and  regals  were  really  more  significant.  While 
church  organs  were  meant  solely  to  support  and  intensify  the 
unison  Plain-Song  or  some  stiff  counterpoint,  and  were  coarse 
and  strident  in  tone  and  awkward  to  play,  the  smaller  forms 
could  be  used  for  all  sorts  of  tonal  experiments,  were  often  sweet 
in  quality  and  relatively  easy  to  play,  being  distinctly  conducive 


2 1 8 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


to  the  advance  of  keyboard  technique.  The  arts  of  organ-play- 
ing and  of  composition  for  the  organ  were  doubtless  developed 
largely  outside  the  churches,  though  in  the  16th  and  17th  cen- 
turies they  came  into  important  use  in  church  worship. 

Organ-making  was  originally  in  the  hands  of  monks,  but  by  about 
1500  it  began  to  be  widely  undertaken  as  a general  trade,  so  that  we  en- 
counter from  that  time  the  names  of  many  organ-builders.  No  sure  esti- 
mate can  be  made  of  the  number  of  instruments  in  use  at  any  given  period, 
but  it  is  clear  that  by  the  17th  century  they  were  common  and  that  the 
ambition  for  mechanical  improvement  was  thoroughly  awakened. 

The  mechanical  problems  of  organ-making  are  manifold.  They  are 
usually  grouped  under  three  heads  — the  pipe-work,  the  wind-supply,  and 
the  action.  Under  the  first  belong  questions  regarding  the  selection  and 
preparation  of  metal  and  wood  for  the  pipes,  the  exact  shape  and  propor- 
tions of  the  pipes  with  reference  to  pitch  and  quality  of  tone  (including 
the  invention  of  those  varying  types  of  structure  that  belong  to  distinct 
‘stops’  or  ‘registers’),  and  many  niceties  in  the  adjustment  of  the 
‘ mouth  ’ or  the  reed  by  which  the  tone  is  actually  produced.  Under  the 
head  of  wind-supply  fall  the  problems  of  pumping  air  into  a reservoir  or 
‘bellows,’  where  somehow  it  can  be  brought  under  a steady  pressure 
and  then  distributed  by  tubes  to  the  ‘ wind-chests  ’ under  the  pipes 
so  as  to  be  ready  for  delivery  into  the  pipes  as  wanted.  It  is  re- 
markable how  much  difficulty  has  been  encountered  in  avoiding  leak- 
age and  maintaining  a uniform  pressure.  Under  the  ‘action’  comes 
the  adjustment  of  one  or  more  keyboards  to  the  valves  admitting  the  air 
to  the  pipes,  with  the  control  of  the  several  sets  of  pipes  by  stop-handles, 
every  connection  having  to  be  made  easy,  prompt  and  noiseless.  Not 
until  about  the  17th  century  did  the  modern  notion  fully  emerge  of  unit- 
ing several  distinct  organs,  each  with  its  own  keyboard,  into  one  instru- 
ment, though  more  than  one  keyboard  had  often  been  used  before. 
The  addition  of  a pedal  keyboard  was  common  from  the  15th  century. 
Among  special  devices,  that  of  the  ‘swell’  in  some  form  (to  vary  the  loud- 
ness of  some  of  the  tones)  is  of  great  utility,  but  it  is  doubtfiil  if  it  ap- 
peared before  the  early  18th  century. 

The  making  of  large  organs  differed  from  other  branches  of  instrument- 
making in  that  most  or  all  of  the  work  was  originally  done  not  in  fixed 
factories,  as  now,  but  on  the  spot,  so  that  organ-makers  moved  from  place 
to  place  as  their  services  were  required.  Each  maker  had  his  own 
patterns  or  models,  and  details  varied  indefinitely. 

103.  The  Rise  of  the  Organ  Style.  — The  problem  of  forms  of 
composition  for  the  organ  remained  unsolved  far  into  the  17th 
century.  The  earlier  experiments  were  strictly  contrapuntal 
and  modeled  closely  upon  vocal  styles.  Yet  it  was  seen  that 
the  instrument  was  capable  of  much  more  — massive  chord-suc- 


THE  ORGAN  AND  THE  ORGAN  STYLE 


219 


cessions,  manifold  unvocal  passages  and  figures,  striking  effects 
of  contrasted  tone-color.  The  trend  of  invention  was  long 
toward  chaotic  fantasias  or  ricercari  with  much  use  of  aimless 
scales  and  embellishments,  and  of  tedious  or  ill-organized  imita- 
tions. As  an  offset,  various  dance-patterns  were  often  trans- 
ferred bodily  to  the  organ,  though  these  did  not  fully  comport 
with  its  dignity  or  its  church  associations. 

In  the  17th  century  better  standards  came  in,  especially  in  the 
adoption  of  definite  ‘ subjects  ’ for  exposition,  in  the  invention 
of  appropriate  ‘ figures  ’ for  elaboration,  and  in  the  devising  of 
harmonic  and  modulatory  plans  with  real  coherence  and  prog- 
ress. In  Germany  we  now  find  increasing  emphasis  on  two 
particular  forms,  the  true  fugue,  with  its  systematic  unfolding 
of  a 1 subject  ’ and  its  * answer,’  and  the  chorale-elaboration,  with 
its  orderly  and  ingenious  treatment  of  the  melodic  and  har- 
monic substance  of  church  songs.  The  genius  of  Germany 
began  to  exercise  itself  in  a new  sort  of  counterpoint,  one  based 
upon  the  keyboard  and  the  organ  tone  instead  of  upon  the  voice, 
and  hence  far  freer  in  details  and  more  sensuously  impressive 
than  the  old  polyphony.  This  was  a legitimate  advance,  though 
distinctly  novel,  and  pointed  toward  the  extremely  liberal  and 
majestic  contrapuntal  styles  of  the  18th  century.  Its  reaction 
was  profound  upon  choral  music  and  upon  all  keyboard  writing. 

The  ‘fugue’  is  the  most  elaborate  of  contrapuntal  forms.  Its  techni- 
cal basis  is  the  principle  of  strict  imitation  that  was  first  wrought  out  by 
the  Netherlanders  in  vocal  works,  especially  in  the  ‘canon  a work  or 
passage  in  which  a ‘ subject,’  after  being  stated  by  one  voice,  is  repeated 
note  for  note  or  interval  for  interval  by  another  voice  or  by  several  voices 
in  succession,  each  voice  proceeding  in  counterpoint  as  the  others  enter, 
and  the  imitation  continuing  throughout.  (If  the  imitation  uses  the 
same  tones  as  the  ‘ subject,’  the  canon  is  ‘ at  the  unison,’  if  those  a tone 
higher,  ‘at  the  second,’  etc.)  Experiments  with  this  kind  of  writing 
early  showed  that  there  is  a peculiar  value  in  a canon  ‘ at  the  fifth,’  that 
is,  one  in  which  the  imitation  is  in  the  key  of  the  dominant  or  at  least 
circles  about  the  dominant  as  the  ‘subject’  does  about  the  keynote. 
This  species  of  canonic  imitation  is  characteristic  of  the  true  fugue.  If 
the  dominant  relation  is  regarded  somewhat  as  in  the  mediaeval  relation  of 
plagal  to  authentic  modes  or  vice  versa , so  that  both  the  tonic  and  the 
dominant  series  utilize  the  same  scale-tones,  the  fugue  is  called  ‘ tonal.’ 
If,  however,  the  imitation  is  literally  in  the  key  of  the  dominant,  using 
one  tone  not  in  the  original  scale,  the  fugue  is  ‘ real.’ 

Throughout  the  16th  century  the  name  ‘fuga’  was  not  uncommon, 
usually  designating  what  would  now  be  called  a canon.  The  derivation 


220 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


of  the  word  is  in  dispute,  Italian  usage  favoring  the  meaning  ‘ flight  ’ or 
‘pursuit,’  German  usage,  that  of  ‘fitting  together.’  Meanwhile,  fugal 
passages  were  frequent  in  all  sorts  of  writing,  though  very  rarely  expanded 
to  entire  works  based  upon  a single  ‘subject,’  as  in  the  true  fugue.  In 
the  17th  century  instrumental  writing  generally  tended  often  to  adopt  the 
fugal  form,  as  in  many  Italian  ‘sonatas’  and  French  ‘overtures.’  The 
final  eminence  of  the  organ  fugue  was  due  to  the  aptness  of  the  organ 
for  strong  and  majestic  polyphony  under  the  hands  of  a single  performer. 
(For  some  other  features  of  the  completed  fugue-form,  see  sec.  139.) 

The  influence  of  organ  music,  then,  was  highly  beneficial  to 
the  whole  theory  of  composition,  powerfully  advancing  the  art 
of  pure  harmony,  maintaining  interest  in  counterpoint,  and 
to  some  extent  counterbalancing  the  drift  toward  captivating 
superficiality  that  the  opera  was  fostering  with  alarming  success. 

All  the  favorite  forms  of  writing  were  essentially  fantasias,  having  no 
fixed  method.  On  the  whole,  the  ‘ricercare’  was  the  closest  and  strong- 
est, the  ‘ toccata,’  more  devoted  to  passages  and  other  points  of  virtuosity, 
the  ‘ canzona  in  the  French  style,’  usually  based  upon  a special  metric 
pattern  and  disposed  in  short  sections  like  a song,  and  the  ‘ capriccio,’ 
midway  between  the  ricercare  and  the  toccata,  with  frequent  changes  of 
theme.  The  treatment  was  at  first  almost  wholly  contrapuntal,  though 
not  confined  to  a single  or  extended  cantus.  Later  more  solid  harmony 
came  in,  but  it  was  hampered  by  the  imperfect  theory  of  tuning,  which 
made  only  certain  chords  satisfactory  and  precluded  free  modulation.  In 
Spain  writing  was  much  influenced  by  the  frequency  of  ‘ divided  stops,’ 
inviting  antiphonal  or  dialogue  passages.  Until  after  1600  the  indepen- 
dent use  of  the  pedals  was  unusual.  Not  until  then  was  there  any  clear 
sense  of  using  solo  melodies  with  accompaniment. 

Among  the  many  early  organists  known,  a few  stand  out  in  prominence : — 

In  the  14th  century  worked  Francesco  Landino  (d.  1397),  a blind  Florentine 
of  noble  family,  whose  genius  as  both  poet  and  musician  won  him  renown  and 
of  whose  varied  works  many  specimens  remain ; besides  several  players  at 
St.  Mark’s  in  Venice,  and  one  or  two  in  France,  like  Robert  Labbe  (d.  c.  1432), 
at  Rouen  from  1386.  Among  organ-builders  were  Jacobello,  the  reputed 
builder  of  the  first  organ  at  St.  Mark’s,  Joachim  Schund,  the  maker  in  1356 
of  what  became  the  nucleus  of  the  organ  of  the  Thomaskirche  in  Leipsic,  and 
Nicol  Faber,  whose  famous  organ  at  Halberstadt  (1361)  was  described  by 
M.  Pratorius  in  1618. 

In  the  15th  century  attention  to  the  church  organ  increased,  and  with  it  the 
freer  use  of  pedals.  In  Italy,  besides  the  players  at  St.  Mark’s  (see  sec.  56), 
appeared  Antonio  Squarcialupi  (d.  1475),  a high-born  favorite  of  Lorenzo 
de’  Medici  at  Florence  and  organist  of  the  cathedral.  Contemporary  with 
him  was  Konrad  Paumann  (d.  1473),  the  blind  player  at  St.  Sebald’s  in 
Nuremberg  from  before  1446  and  at  Munich  from  1467,  a notable  pioneer, 
famous  throughout  Germany,  Austria  and  Italy,  from  whom  come  the  earliest 


THE  ORGAN  AND  THE  ORGAN  STYLE 


221 


known  organ-studies.  Later  German  organists  were  Schlick  of  Heidelberg 
(also  blind)  and  Hofheimer  (d.  1537)  of  Salzburg  and  Vienna  (see  sec.  63). 
Both  of  these  inspired  many  pupils.  By  this  time  the  number  of  organ- 
builders  had  become  large,  as  instruments  were  in  great  demand. 

In  the  1 6th  century  two  notable  lines  of  advance  appeared,  the  one  in  Italy 
under  the  Netherlanders  and  the  Venetians,  the  other  in  South  Germany.  In 
the  former  were  many  composers  already  mentioned  (see  Chapter  VII.),  es- 
pecially Willaert,  De  Buus,  De  Rore,  Merulo,  the  Gabrielis  and  Antegnati,  with 
some  others  — their  general  style  being  gradually  evolved  into  forms  like  the 
toccata,  the  ricercare,  the  French  canzona,  the  capriccio,  etc.,  in  which  the  ten- 
dency was  to  alternate  between  solid  chord-successions  and  flights  of  scales, 
sometimes  with  some  semblance  of  a persistent  ‘ subject,1  sometimes  with  a 
capricious  shifting  from  theme  to  theme.  In  the  latter  were  some  already 
named  (see  Chapter  VIII.),  like  Ammerbach,  Hassler,  the  Schmids  and  Paix, 
with  many  others  — their  general  style,  especially  in  the  second  half  of  the 
century,  tending  toward  a peculiar  treatment  of  thematic  material  by  an  excess 
of  mere  figuration  ( coloraturen , whence  the  writers  were  called  color isten), 
the  presentation  of  structural  ideas  being  choked  or  hidden  under  a mass  of 
ingenious,  but  petty,  detail.  (The  last  notable  publication  of  the  ‘colorist1 
school  was  the  collection  in  1617  by  Johann  Woltz,  for  40  years  organist  at  Heil- 
bronn,  the  third  part  of  which  consists  of  pieces  in  tablature  for  church  use.) 

In  other  countries,  also,  the  organ  was  studied  with  success,  especially 
by  Sweelinck  of  Amsterdam  and  by  several  Englishmen,  like  Byrd,  Bull  and 
Phillips,  with  some  others.  While  these  scattered  workers  often  went  beyond 
their  Italian  and  German  contemporaries  in  independence  and  in  the  percep- 
tion of  the  styles  suited  to  the  instrument,  they  were  as  a rule  less  influential 
(except  Sweelinck).  Late  in  the  century  Italian  writers  began  to  publish  col- 
lections of  strictly  church  pieces,  thus  marking  the  separation  of  the  ritual  use 
of  the  church  organ  from  that  of  small,  private  organs.  An  example  is  that  of 
Antonio  Valente  of  Naples  (1580). 

Among  Italian  organists  not  already  named  were  Florentio  Maschera,  from 
1557  at  Brescia,  with  popular  canzone  (1584)  ; Luzzasco  Luzzaschi  (d.  c.  160 7), 
at  Ferrara  from  1576,  highly  praised  as  a player;  Sper1  in  Dio  Bertoldo  of 
Padua  (d.  c.  1590),  with  toccatas,  ricercari  and  canzone  (1591)  ; and  Gioseffo 
Guami  (d.  1611),  from  1568  at  Munich,  from  1579  at  Genoa,  from  1588  at  St. 
Mark’s,  Venice,  and  from  1591  at  Lucca,  with  canzone  (1601),  besides  earlier 
madrigals  and  motets. 

In  northern  countries  should  be  added  Leonhard  Kleber  (d.  1556),  for  over 
30  years  at  Pforzheim  (Baden),  who  edited  an  important  collection  (1522-4), 
mostly  in  a style  prefiguring  the  ‘colorists1;  Charles  Luyton  (d.  1620),  a 
Netherlander,  court-organist  at  Prague  from  1576,  an  original  composer  (from 
1582)  and  the  inventor  of  a clavichord  with  divided  semitones  (19  keys  to  the 
octave),  facilitating  varied  harmony  in  pure  intonation ; and  Pieter  Cornet, 
organist  to  the  Spanish  Infanta  at  Brussels  (few  works  extant). 

In  Spain,  also,  were  Antonio  de  Cabezon  (d.  1566),  the  blind  organist  of 
Philip  II.,  represented  by  a large  collection  (1578),  edited  by  his  son;  and 
Bernard  Clavijo,  professor  at  Salamanca,  and  later  royal  organist  at  Madrid, 
with  many  works  (mostly  burnt  in  1734). 


222 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


104.  Italian  Organists.  — After  1600  the  number  of  competent 
players  rapidly  increased  and  their  equipment  became  more 
varied,  since  both  the  capacity  of  the  instrument  and  interest 
in  its  music  were  developing.  As  styles  of  writing  became 
better  defined,  its  dignity,  with  its  aptitude  for  intricate  part- 
writing and  for  tonal  variety,  was  more  appreciated.  Gradually 
the  stiff  effects  of  the  earlier  period  were  softened  by  more  real 
melody  and  a richer  harmony,  and  decorative  elements  were 
gradually  reduced  from  undue  prominence. 

In  Italy  the  leadership  plainly  fell  to  Frescobaldi  of  Rome, 
one  of  the  noblest  geniuses  of  organ-history,  whose  influence 
was  widely  felt.  His  works  were  many  and  diversified.  While 
adhering  to  the  old  modes  in  ritual  pieces,  he  was  enterprising 
with  modern  tonality  elsewhere.  His  use  of  chromatics  and 
modulation  was  often  free,  implying  the  existence  of  unusually 
advanced  tuning.  He  discarded  the  real  for  the  tonal  fugue, 
and  revived  effective  double  counterpoint.  His  pieces  abound 
in  technical  difficulties,  but  subordinated  to  a firm  general  con- 
ception. His  style  often  has  an  energy  and  even  impetuosity 
that  betokens  an  absolute  mastery  of  his  materials. 

Besides  Agazzari,  Cifra  and  Ugolini  of  the  Roman  school  and  Banchieri 
and  Bassani  of  Bologna  (see  secs.  93-94),  the  following  are  notable : — 

Girolamo  Diruta  (d.  after  1612),  pupil  of  Merulo  and  organist  from  1597  at 
Chioggia  and  from  1609  at  Gubbio,  besides  being  a good  player  and  com- 
poser, edited  an  important  organ-book  (1593-1609),  in  which,  besides  valuable 
specimens  of  works  by  several  hands,  the  organ  style  is  for  the  first  time 
extended  to  other  instruments. 

At  Ferrara  was  Alexandre  Milleville  (d.  1589),  French  by  birth,  from  1544 
at  Modena  and  from  1575  at  Ferrara,  with  his  son  Francesco.  Antonio  Mor- 
taro  (d.  1619),  successively  at  Milan,  Novara  and  Brescia,  wrote  good  canzone, 
etc.  (from  1599).  Giovanni  Paolo  Cima  of  Milan  (works  from  1606),  and  his 
brother  Andrea  Cima  of  Milan  and  Bergamo,  a famous  player,  now  known 
only  by  vocal  works  (from  1614),  are  also  noteworthy. 

Girolamo  Frescobaldi  (d.  1644),  born  at  Ferrara  in  1583  and  a pupil  of 
Luzzaschi,  probably  began  his  career  at  Antwerp,  but  from  1608  was  organist 
at  St.  Peter’s  in  Rome,  except  for  brief  sojourns  at  Mantua  in  1614-5  an°l  33 
court-organist  at  Florence  in  1628-33.  His  playing  attracted  great  admiration, 
and  his  works  (from  1608)  include  every  variety  of  form  already  named,  with 
partite  (variations),  preludes  and  dances,  many  of  them  meant  for  either  the 
organ  or  the  clavichord.  They  are  written  in  the  prevalent  notation  for  the 
latter  (a  6-line  staff  for  the  right  hand  and  an  8-line  for  the  left),  with  com- 
paratively little  use  of  the  pedals.  Among  his  greater  pupils  were  the  Ger- 
mans Froberger  and  Tunder. 


THE  SOUTH  GERMAN  SCHOOL 


223 


Giovanni  Maria  Trabacci,  royal  organist  at  Naples,  issued  two  books  of  ricer- 
cari  (1603,  ’15),  besides  vocal  works  ; and  Giovanni  Battista  Fasolo,  a Fran- 
ciscan of  Palermo,  published  a collection  of  pieces  (1645)  for  every  part  of  the 
church  year,  displaying  ability  within  the  old  modes. 

Bernardo  Pasquini  (d.  1710),  a Tuscan,  born  in  1637  and  a pupil  of  L.  Vittori 
and  Cesti  and  a student  of  Palestrina,  besides  writing  dramatic  works,  became 
famous  as  organist  of  Sta.  Maria  Maggiore  at  Rome  (works  from  1702).  He 
taught  Durante  and  Gasparini. 

Giulio  Cesare  Arresti  (d.  c.  1695),  pupil  and  successor  of  Vernizzi  at 
Bologna,  collected  a notable  series  of  organ-pieces  by  various  17th-century 
composers,  with  some  of  his  own. 

105.  The  South  German  School.  — In  Germany  the  century 
opened  with  two  lines  of  succession  already  established,  the 
southern,  stimulated  by  Italian  influence  at  the  outset,  and  the 
northern,  chiefly  shaped  by  the  genius  of  Sweelinck.  Between 
these  developed  later  the  Saxon  or  Thuringian  school,  influenced 
by  both  and  ultimately  the  greatest  of  all.  In  Austria  Italian 
models  were  naturally  followed,  as  in  other  regions  where  the 
organ  was  connected  with  Catholicism,  but  elsewhere  the  Protes- 
tant chorales  and  their  polyphonic  elaboration,  with  the  study 
of  the  fugue,  absorbed  attention.  In  general,  organ  music 
avoided  secular  themes  and  forms. 

In  the  south  the  most  brilliant  masters  were  Froberger  of 
Vienna  and  Pachelbel  of  Erfurt  and  Nuremberg. 

Johann  Jakob  Froberger  (d.  1667)  was  sent  in  1637  by  the  Emperor  to 
Rome  to  study  with  Frescobaldi,  served  in  1641-57  as  imperial  organist  and 
clavecinist  at  Vienna  with  immense  success,  but  with  long  intermissions, 
probably  for  travel,  and  later  settled  at  Hericourt  (E.  France).  As  a player 
he  was  quite  as  important  on  the  harpsichord  as  on  the  organ,  delighting  in 
such  forms  as  brilliant  toccatas,  capriccios  and  suites  of  a secular  character. 
His  many  works  were  published  posthumously  (from  1693). 

Johann  Kaspar  Kerll  (d.  1693),  born  in  Saxony  in  1627,  was  court-choirmas- 
ter at  Munich  in  1656-73,  and  then,  displaced  by  the  jealousy  of  the  Italian 
singers,  removed  to  Vienna,  becoming  court-organist  in  1677  and  returning  to 
Munich  in  1684.  Like  Froberger,  he  divided  his  attention  between  the  harp- 
sichord and  the  organ,  besides  producing  much  vocal  music.  His  organ 
style  was  solid  and  strong,  foreshadowing  that  of  the  Bachs.  Of  his  many 
instrumental  works  little  was  published  during  his  life  (one  collection,  1686). 

Georg  Muffat  (d.  1704),  of  Scottish  descent,  but  German  by  birth  (c.  1645), 
was  trained  at  Paris  under  Lully’s  influence,  was  organist  at  Strassburg  till 
1675,  then  at  Vienna  and  Salzburg,  whence  he  went  to  Rome  to  study  with  Pa- 
squini, and  from  about  1687  at  Passau.  His  interesting  instrumental  works 
(from  1682)  were  largely  for  the  organ,  and  show  a mixture  of  French  and 
Italian  manners. 


224 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


Early  in  the  century  Nuremberg  became  a centre  of  Protestant  music,  and 
the  organists  of  its  churches  were  often  influential  and  productive  in  styles 
appropriate  to  the  Protestant  service.  Among  them,  though  not  all  composers 
of  eminence,  were  Johann  Staden  (d.  1634),  at  the  Sebalduskirche  from  1620; 
Johann  Erasmus  Kindermann  (d.  1655),  from  1630  at  the  Egidienkirche,  who 
not  only  published  good  preludes  and  fugues  (from  1645),  besides  other  instru- 
mental works,  but  was  an  excellent  teacher;  Sigmund  Staden  (d.  1655),  the 
son  of  Johann  above,  who,  after  work  at  Berlin,  was  from  1635  at  the  Lorenz- 
kirche;  Heinrich  Schwemmer  (d.  1696),  a pupil  of  Kindermann,  and,  though 
only  late  in  life  an  active  organist,  a teacher  of  important  pupils ; Paul  Heinlein 
(d.  1686),  from  1655  at  the  Sebalduskirche,  a prolific  and  admired  com- 
poser; Georg  Kaspar  Wecker  (d.  1695),  a pupil  of  Kindermann  and  his  suc- 
cessor in  1655  and  also  of  Heinlein  in  1686;  not  to  mention  others,  like  the 
brothers  Philipp  Krieger  (d.  1725)  and  Johann  Krieger  (d.  1735),  both  born  at 
Nuremberg  and  more  or  less  trained  there,  both  organists  at  Bayreuth,  and  the 
one  from  1680  at  Weissenfels  and  the  other  from  1681  at  Zittau. 

Johann  Pachelbel  (d.  1706),  born  in  1653  at  Nuremberg,  was  trained  at 
Altdorf  and  Ratisbon.  His  official  life  was  a broken  one  — from  1674  at 
Vienna,  from  1677  at  Eisenach,  from  1678  at  Erfurt,  from  1690  at  Stuttgart, 
from  1692  at  Gotha,  and  from  1695  at  Nuremberg,  succeeding  Wecker  at 
the  Sebalduskirche.  His  abundant  organ-works  were  left  mostly  in  MS., 
except  some  good  preludes  and  variations  (1683-99).  His  style  was  diversi- 
fied, uniting  the  brilliance  and  effectiveness  of  the  southern  school  with  much 
of  the  solidity  of  the  northern.  He  was  one  of  the  pioneers  in  the  competent 
development  of  the  chorale-prelude.  He  was  diligently  studied  by  the  great 
Bach,  and  was  clearly  one  of  his  early  models,  though  lacking  in  the  power 
of  extended  and  sustained  treatment.  While  at  Erfurt,  he  taught  many  good 
pupils,  like  Vetter,  Buttstett  and  J.  C.  Bach  (J.  S.  Bach’s  elder  brother),  who 
were  later  prominent  in  central  Germany. 

Other  names  are  Johann  Ulrich  Steigleder  (d.  1635)  of  Stuttgart,  a con- 
temporary of  Scheidt,  with  ricercari  and  variations  (from  1624),  and  Sebastian 
Anton  Scherer,  cathedral-organist  at  Ulm,  with  organ-pieces  (1664)  and  other 
works. 

106.  The  North  German  School.  — The  extent  of  Sweelinck’s 
personal  influence  was  exceedingly  wide,  his  most  distinguished 
pupils  being  scattered  from  Hanover  and  Hamburg  on  the  west 
to  Danzig  on  the  east  and  to  Halle  in  Saxony.  From  him  came 
a sound  perception  of  the  special  qualities  of  treatment  germane 
to  the  organ,  a vigorous  conception  of  the  fugue  as  the  greatest 
single  form  available,  with  its  capacity  for  every  phase  of  con- 
trapuntal art,  and  an  enterprising  and  genial  breadth  of  view  as 
to  the  possibilities  of  organ  progress.  Several  of  his  pupils 
were  really  greater  than  he,  but  to  him  is  due  the  impulse  that 
later  made  Germany  the  home  of  the  noblest  organ  style.  His 
connection  with  Italy  has  already  been  noted  (see  secs.  66,  103). 


THE  NORTH  GERMAN  SCHOOL 


225 


Sweelinck’s  greater  pupils  include  the  following:  — 

Samuel  Scheldt  (d.  1654),  born  at  Halle  in  1587,  where,  after  his  study 
with  the  Dutch  master,  he  became  in  1609  court-organist  at  the  Moritzkirche 
and  for  a time  choirmaster  as  well,  continuing  till  his  death  almost  half  a 
century  later.  His  works  were  largely  vocal,  but  included  the  much-lauded 
Tabulatura  nova  (1624),  sinfonie  ( 1644),  and  chorale-preludes,  etc.  (1650), 
which  show  him  to  be  one  of  the  founders  of  the  art  of  chorale-elaboration 
that  replaced  the  older  ‘ colorist  ’ style.  He  was  not  so  daring  an  innovator  as 
his  close  contemporary  Frescobaldi,  nor  perhaps  as  great  a genius  as  his 
followers  thought  him,  but  his  eminence  is  unquestionable.  His  traditional 
place  as  one  of  ‘the  three  S’s1  (with  Schiitz  of  Dresden  and  Schein  of 
Leipsic,  all  three  being  nearly  of  an  age)  is,  however,  probably  due  to  his 
success  with  vocal  works. 

Jakob  Pratorius  (d.  1651),  the  son  of  Hieronymus  (see  sec.  62),  though 
born  in  1586  at  Erfurt,  was  brought  up  at  Hamburg,  where,  after  studying 
with  Sweelinck,  he  was  from  1603  for  almost  50  years  organist  of  the  Petri- 
kirche.  His  virtuosity  was  famous,  but  little  is  known  of  his  compositions. 

Heinrich  Scheidemann  (d.  1663?)  came  of  a family  of  organists  at  Ham- 
burg, and,  after  being  trained  by  his  father  and  by  Sweelinck  (at  the  city's 
expense),  he  succeeded  the  former  at  the  Katharinenkirche  in  1625,  remaining 
till  his  death.  Most  of  his  works  are  lost,  except  a few  settings  of  poems  by 
Rist  (1651)  and  some  scattered  pieces,  but  laudatory  references  to  his  skill  are 
preserved,  and  he  taught  Reinken,  his  more  famous  successor,  and  Fabricius 
of  Leipsic. 

Melchior  Schildt  (d.  1667)  is  sometimes  called  Sweelinck's  best  pupil. 
After  brief  terms  of  service  at  Wolfenbiittel  from  1623  and  at  Copenhagen  from 
1626,  he  was  from  1629  at  the  Marktkirche  at  Hanover.  His  style  is  said  to 
have  been  peculiarly  expressive,  but  his  extant  works  (from  1642)  are  meagre. 

Paul  Siefert  (d.  1666),  born  at  Danzig,  after  working  with  Sweelinck,  was 
in  the  Royal  Chapel  of  Poland  for  some  years.  Returning  to  Danzig,  he  be- 
came organist  in  1623  at  the  Marienkirche,  being  succeeded  at  his  death  by 
Ewald  Hinsch,  a pupil  of  Froberger.  Besides  some  MS.  organ-pieces,  his 
only  known  works  are  two  sets  of  Psalms  (1640, ’51),  the  first  of  which  was 
the  occasion  of  a sharp  attack  by  Marco  Scacchi  (d.  before  1685),  royal 
choirmaster  of  Poland,  to  which  Siefert  replied  in  1645.  If  traditions  are 
right,  Siefert  was  opinionated  and  quarrelsome. 

Delphin  Strunck  (d.  1694),  born  in  1601,  was  organist  at  Wolfenbiittel  in 
1630-2,  then  at  Celle,  and  from  1639  at  the  Martinikirche  in  Brunswick. 
A few  chorale-preludes  of  his  remain,  showing  the  beginnings  of  the  line-by- 
line treatment  that  was  frequent  later. 

Franz  Tunder  (d.  1667),  born  in  1614  and  a pupil  of  Frescobaldi,  was  from 
1641  at  the  Marienkirche  at  Liibeck.  From  him  we  have  a few  chorale-elabora- 
tions and  some  motets  with  accompaniment. 

Johann  Martin  Rubert  (d.  1680),  also  born  in  1614  at  Nuremberg,  studied 
at  Hamburg  and  Leipsic,  and  in  1640  became  organist  at  the  Nikolaikirche  at 
Stralsund.  His  style  is  said  to  have  been  dignified  and  even  austere,  but  no 
organ-works  of  his  are  now  known,  though  we  have  part-songs,  violin-duets 
and  short  cantatas  (from  1645).  Contemporary  with  him  at  Stralsund  in  the 
Q 


226 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


Marienkirche  was  Johann  Vierdanck,  with  dances,  capriccios  and  many  motets 
(from  1641). 

Matthias  Weckmann  (d.1674),  a Thuringian,  born  in  1621  and  a pupil  of 
Schiitz,  J.  Pratorius  and  Scheidemann,  assisted  at  the  Dresden  Chapel  in  1641-2 
and  in  1647-54,  serving  in  Denmark  in  the  interval,  in  1655  won  appointment 
at  the  Jacobikirche  in  Hamburg,  and  founded  an  important  series  of  concerts 
there  in  1668.  His  extant  works  are  mostly  motets  and  some  chorale- 
elaborations,  with  remarkable  harpsichord-sonatas,  toccatas  and  suites. 

Jan  Reinken  (d.  1722),  born  in  1623  in  Lower  Alsace,  studied  with  Scheide- 
mann at  Hamburg  and  in  1663  followed  him  at  the  Katharinenkirche,  where 
he  remained  almost  60  years,  the  Nestor  of  North  German  organists.  Though 
doubtless  over-conceited,  his  ability  cannot  be  gainsaid,  since  he  aroused  ex- 
traordinary interest  on  the  part  of  J.  S.  Bach,  whom  he  hailed  as  his  true  suc- 
cessor in  chorale-treatment.  Of  his  works  we  have  only  a few  elaborations,  a 
toccata,  and  some  variations  and  chamber  music.  His  will  directed  that  his 
MSS.  should  be  burnt. 

Dietrich  Buxtehude  (d.  1707),  the  greatest  of  the  whole  school,  was  born  in 
1637  at  Helsingor  (Denmark),  where  his  father  was  organist  32  years.  After 
thorough  training  from  the  latter,  in  1668  he  succeeded  Tunder  at  Liibeck 
(marrying  his  daughter  according  to  custom).  Provided  with  one  of  the  best 
organs  in  Germany  and  enthusiastically  appreciated,  he  won  international 
fame,  especially  through  his  handling  from  1673  of  the  annual  series  of  musical 
vespers  in  November  and  December  which  were  perhaps  instituted  by  Tunder 
and  which  continued  till  the  early  19th  century.  At  these,  famous  singers  and 
players  assisted,  and  for  them  Buxtehude  wrote  many  Abendmusiken. 
Nearly  70  organ- works  of  his  have  survived,  largely  chorale-elaborations,  with 
13  fugues,  3 toccatas,  etc.,  also  some  wedding- hymns.  He  was  a thorough 
virtuoso,  facile  and  brilliant  in  technique  (on  the  pedals  as  well  as  the  man- 
uals), and  original  in  registration,  while  as  a composer  he  excelled  in  the 
invention  of  characteristic  themes  and  in  their  intricate,  but  effective,  develop- 
ment into  closely-knit  movements  of  almost  modern  solidity.  His  influence 
upon  Bach  was  profoundly  stimulating. 

Vincent  Liibeck  (d.  1740),  born  near  Bremen  in  1654  and  trained  by  his 
father,  served  from  1674  at  Stade  for  almost  30  years,  and  from  1702  at 
the  Nikolaikirche  in  Hamburg.  His  works  have  almost  all  vanished  (clavier- 
suite,  1728),  but  the  fact  that  Bach  repeatedly  took  pains  to  hear  him  indicates 
his  ability. 

Georg  Bohm  (d.  1733),  born  in  1661  near  Gotha,  was  first  trained  in 
Pachelbel’s  style  and  at  Hamburg  under  Reinken,  besides  studying  French 
instrumental  music.  From  1698  he  was  at  the  Johanniskirche  in  Liineburg, 
so  that  Bach  in  his  school-days  there  came  directly  under  his  influence.  With 
him  the  art  of  chorale-elaboration  appears  in  full  maturity.  Of  his  works  we 
have  several  chorale-variations,  a fugue,  and  some  clavier-suites  and  sacred 
songs.  He  also  wrote  a Passion,  not  now  known. 

Nikolaus  Bruhns  (d.  1697),  a pupil  of  Buxtehude,  was  organist  first  at 
Copenhagen  and  later  at  Husum  (Schleswig).  His  reputation  in  his  day 
was  almost  equal  to  his  master’s.  He  was  also  a remarkably  expert  violinist. 


THE  THURINGIAN  SCHOOL 


227 


107.  The  Thuringian  School.  — In  central  Germany  (mainly 
Thuringia  and  Saxony)  there  was  a considerable  interlocking 
of  influences.  Workers  here  were  affected  by  traditions  from 
both  the  Catholic  and  the  Protestant  sides.  While  their  more 
natural  affiliation  was  with  the  South  German  school,  especially 
as  Pachelbel  was  for  a time  at  Erfurt,  the  stronger  northern 
styles  were  eagerly  studied  and  adopted,  so  that  by  the  end  of 
the  century  this  middle  school  presented  an  amalgamation  of 
the  best  from  all  sources.  Conspicuous  among  the  masters 
here  were  many  of  the  Bachs. 

The  long  line  of  organists  in  the  Bach  family  includes,  in  the  fourth 
generation,  Johann  (d.  1673),  town-musician  at  Erfurt  from  1635  and  organ- 
ist at  the  Predigerkirche  from  1647,  and  Heinrich  (d.  1692),  his  brother  and 
pupil,  town-musician  and  organist  at  Arnstadt  from  1641,  a worthy  worker  in 
chorales  and  the  teacher  of  his  two  sons  ; in  the  fifth  generation,  Joh.  Christian 
(d.  1682),  who  succeeded  Johann  at  Erfurt  in  1673  and  was  in  turn  followed 
by  his  brother  Joh.  Egidius  (d.  1717)  — with  the  distinguished  brothers  Joh. 
Christoph  of  Eisenach  (d.  1703)  and  Joh.  Michael  of  Gehren  (d.  1694), 
Heinrich’s  sons  (see  sec.  97)  ; and  several  in  the  sixth  generation  who  be- 
long rather  to  the  18th  century.  Here  the  influence  of  Pachelbel  became 
marked. 

Werner  Fabricius  (d.  1679),  born  in  Holstein  in  1633,  won  notice  as  a 
clavichordist  when  not  12  years  old,  was  taught  by  Selle  and  Scheidemann 
at  Hamburg,  studied  law  as  well  as  music  at  Leipsic,  and  became  organist  of 
the  Nikolaikirche  there  in  1657,  being  famous  both  as  a virtuoso  and  as  an 
organ-expert.  His  extant  works  (from  1657)  are  motets,  chorales,  some 
dances  and  a handbook  on  organ-examination  (1656). 

Andreas  Werckmeister  (d.  1706),  born  in  1645  in  the  Hartz,  trained  by 
two  uncles,  was  from  1664  organist  at  Hasselfelde,  from  1675  at  Quedlinburg 
(where  he  wrote  his  best  works),  and  from  1696  at  Halberstadt,  where  he 
was  also  city-councilor  and  royal  organ-inspector.  His  importance  lay  in  his 
unequaled  knowledge  of  organ-building,  his  hostility  to  inartistic  and  ill- 
made  instruments,  and  his  theoretical  writings  (see  sec.  113),  of  which  those 
on  the  organ  were  the  Orgetyrobe  (1681),  the  pioneer  study  of  equal  tempera- 
ment (1691),  and  an  account  of  the  organ  at  Griiningen. 

Friedrich  Wilhelm  Zachau  (d.  1712),  bom  at  Leipsic  in  1663,  pupil  of  his 
father,  in  1684  became  organist  at  the  Marktkirche  at  Halle.  As  player  and 
composer  he  was  careful  and  exact.  His  fame  rests  on  the  fact  that  for 
several  years  before  1702  he  was  Handel’s  teacher,  firmly  grounding  him  in 
the  technique  of  composition. 

Johann  Heinrich  Buttstett  (d.  1727),  born  near  Erfurt  in  1666  and  a pupil 
of  Pachelbel  there,  began  as  organist  in  1684  and  followed  his  master  at  the 
Predigerkirche  in  1691.  His  works  (1705-20)  include  chorale- variations, 
fugues,  4 masses,  etc.  He  sought  to  withstand  the  drift  toward  freer  styles  in 
church  music  by  a pamphlet  (1717). 


228 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


Among  many  other  names  may  be  mentioned  Johann  Kuhnau  (d.  1722), 
organist  at  the  Thomaskirche  in  Leipsic  in  1684-1701  and  Bach’s  predecessor 
at  the  Thomasschule  ; Johann  Philipp  Bendeler  (d.  1708),  cantor  at  Quedlin- 
burg  and  an  important  writer  on  organ-making  (c.  1690)  ; and  Nikolaus  Vetter 
(d.  1710),  pupil  of  Wecker  and  Pachelbel,  from  1691  court-organist  at 
Rudolstadt,  later  an  organ-teacher  as  well  as  lawyer. 

108.  In  Western  Europe.  — As  compared  with  the  portentous 
development  in  Germany,  which  was  laying  broad  foundations 
for  still  greater  production  later,  the  advance  of  organ  music 
elsewhere  was  much  less  significant,  though  some  excellent 
masters  may  be  cited.  Only  in  England  were  these  numerous 
enough  to  affect  the  national  style  as  a whole.  In  France  key- 
board music  tended  rather  to  styles  suited  to  the  clavichord 
instead  of  the  organ. 

In  France  there  were  no  noted  players  till  toward  the  end  of  the  century. 
In  1678  the  post  of  royal  organist  was  divided  between  four  incumbents,  each 
serving  three  months  at  a time.  Among  these  were  Giullaume  Gabriel  Nivers 
(d.  after  1701),  pupil  of  Chambonnieres,  with  many  works,  theoretical  and 
practical  (from  1646),  including  choir-  and  organ-pieces  for  the  Catholic  ser- 
vice, Nicholas  Antoine  Le  Begue  (d.  1702),  with  some  similar  works  (from 
1675),  and  Jacques  Thomelin.  [Nivers  and  Le  Begue,  with  the  elder 
Francois  Couperin  (d.  1698),  were  among  those  who  successfully  opposed  the 
bizarre  pretensions  of  Guillaume  du  Manoir  to  rule  the  profession  as  1 Roi  des 
violons1  in  virtue  of  a patent  originally  granted  in  the  14th  century  (book  on 
music  and  the  dance,  1664).]  Another  able  composer  for  organ  and  clavier 
was  Andre  Raison  (works,  1687-1714). 

In  Spain  and  Portugal  were  Manoel  Rodrigues  Coelho  of  Lisbon  (important 
collection,  1620);  Francisco  Correa  de  Arauxo  (d.  1663),  organist  at  Seville, 
professor  at  Salamanca,  finally  Bishop  of  Segovia  (theoretical  treatise,  1626)  ; 
Andres  Lorente  (d.  1703),  organist  at  Alcala  (treatise,  1672)  ; and  Josef  Cava- 
nillas  (d.  c.  1725),  cathedral-organist  at  Urgel,  a famous  virtuoso. 

In  England  almost  every  church  composer  during  the  century  was  an 
organist  (see  sec.  99),  and  several  of  them,  like  Bull,  0.  Gibbons,  Rogers,  Blow 
and  H.  Purcell,  attained  permanent  distinction. 


CHAPTER  XIV 


THE  VIOLIN.  MUSICAL  LITERATURE 

109.  Stringed  Instruments  in  General.  — Of  all  musical  instru- 
ments, those  with  strings  for  the  sounding  material  have  always 
been  chief.  They  may  be  roughly  classified  under  generic 
names  like  harp,  lyre,  zither  (psaltery),  dulcimer,  lute  and  viol, 
though  cases  occur  which  are  difficult  to  assign. 

The  ‘ harp  1 and  the  ‘ lyre  ’ are  distinguished  by  having  the  strings 
either  wholly  or  partially  free  from  the  soundbox  (except  at  or  near  their 
lower  attachment),  the  string-plane  being  at  right  angles  to  the  face  of 
the  soundbox  in  the  harp,  but  parallel  to  it  in  the  lyre.  Each  string  is 
properly  capable  of  but  one  tone,  the  pitch  of  which  is  not  controlled  by 
‘stopping.’  In  both  cases  the  strings  are  sounded  by  plucking  or  twang- 
ing, with  or  without  a plectrum.  Harps  are  usually  held  with  the  strings 
upright,  but  lyres  (unless  very  large)  are  held  more  or  less  horizontally, 
with  one  edge  of  the  soundbox  down,  so  as  to  present  the  strings  to  the 
player’s  right  hand. 

The  ‘ zither  ’ and  the  ‘ dulcimer  ’ have  the  strings  stretched  from  end  to 
end  over  the  soundbox  or  soundboard.  Upon  the  latter,  frets  or  bridges 
may  be  placed  so  that  some  or  all  of  the  strings  can  be  shortened  by 
pressure  and  thus  made  to  yield  more  than  one  tone.  Historically,  this 
device  of  ‘ stopping  ’ has  been  confined  to  the  zither  or  psaltery.  Zithers 
are  sounded  by  plucking,  dulcimers  by  blows  from  a rod  or  hammer. 

Both  are  usually  placed  horizontally,  the  strings  running  either  across  or 

away  from  the  player. 

The  ‘ lute  ’ and  the  ‘ viol  ’ are  peculiar  in  having  a slender  neck  or 
fingerboard  projecting  from  the  soundbox,  along  which  all  or  most  of  the 
strings  extend  to  tuning-pegs  in  the  head.  All  such  strings  can  be 
‘stopped ’so  as  to  yield  more  than  one  tone.  Lutes  are  sounded  by 
plucking,  sometimes  with  a plectrum,  but  viols  by  the  friction  of  a bow  or 
something  analogous.  Both  are  held  horizontally  and  turned  sidewise 
like  the  lyre,  except  some  larger  varieties  of  the  viol. 

Harps  of  various  kinds  are  shown  in  figs.  6,  18,  30-34,  48,  107 ; lyres  in 
figs.  24,  36-38,  49;  zithers  in  figs.  6,  13,  14,  21,  25,  66;  a dulcimer 

in  fig.  28;  lutes  in  figs.  7,  8,  10,  15,  26,  29,  35,  54-5 7>  65*  IQ8; 

and  viols  in  figs.  9,  16,  17,  23,  27,  50,  52,  64,  70^77,  87,  93. 

Each  of  these  types  has  had  a distinct  history,  often  of  great 
artistic  importance.  Harps  were  conspicuous  in  ancient  times 

229 


230 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


Fig.  66. 


Fig.  63.  — Moroccan  Kouitara,  a modern  survival  of  the  old  lute  type.  FIG.  64. — 
Old  French  Rebec,  made  of  a single  piece  of  wood  (cf.  Fig.  27).  FIG.  65.  — Modern 
Russian  Balalaika  or  Guitar.  FlG.  66.  — Modern  German  Zithers. 


STRINGED  INSTRUMENTS 


231 


in  Assyria,  Egypt  and  Greece ; throughout  the  Middle  Ages 
they  were  known  in  manifold  shapes  and  sizes,  among  the  most 
interesting  being  those  of  the  Kelts ; and  from  these  has  come 
the  modern  orchestral  harp,  whose  perfecting  as  a chromatic 
and  transposing  instrument  was  not  achieved  until  the  early 
19th  century.  Lyres  were  characteristic  in  Egyptian  and  Greek 
music  ; they  continued  in  the  Middle  Ages  as  variants  among 
the  more  common  harps ; in  modern  times  they  have  generally 
been  discarded.  Zithers  were  known  in  ancient  times,  though 
not  prominent ; in  mediaeval  usage  they  were  common  because 
of  their  relatively  great  sonority  in  proportion  to  size ; and  as 
highly  artistic  instruments  their  advance  was  then  delayed  till 
the  19th  century.  Dulcimers  were  known  to  the  Assyrians  and 
the  Greeks ; and  they  persisted  into  the  Middle  Ages  in  varied 
forms.  With  a keyboard  added,  the  zither  type  passed  over  into 
the  harpsichord,  and  the  dulcimer  type  into  the  pianoforte.  The 
clavichord,  the  other  stringed  instrument  with  a keyboard,  was  de- 
rived from  the  ‘monochord  ’ (uniting  features  from  both  zither  and 
dulcimer),  from  which  also  the  curious  ‘ nun’s-fiddle  ’ or  ‘marine 
trumpet’  was  descended  (see  Fig.  52).  Lutes  were  certainly 
used  in  ancient  Egypt  and  probably  by  many  Oriental  nations  ; 
thence,  especially  through  Mohammedan  channels,  they  came 
into  great  prominence  in  mediaeval  Europe  ; in  the  16th  century 
they  were  chief  among  portable  instruments  in  artistic  valuation, 
but  have  since  lost  place,  being  now  represented  only  by  the 
guitar  and  mandolin.  Viols,  which  seem  not  to  have  been  known 
to  the  ancients,  began  to  compete  with  other  types  sometime  in 
the  Middle  Ages,  were  more  and  more  considered  in  the  16th 
century,  and  in  the  17th  assumed  an  artistic  leadership  among 
solo  instruments  that  has  since  not  been  questioned.  Experi- 
ments have  often  been  made  with  keyboard  viols,  like  the  hurdy- 
gurdy  (see  Fig.  51)  and  many  complicated  forms,  but  none  of 
these  has  had  success. 

110.  The  Genesis  of  the  Violin. — Infinite  discussion  has  been 
had  regarding  the  remote  ancestry  of  the  violin,  but  without 
satisfactory  results.  It  is  likely  that  several  early  forms  yielded 
suggestions  which  were  gradually  combined.  Among  these 
probably  were  varieties  of  the  ‘ crwth,’  some  of  which  were  lyres 
or  lutes,  though  one  has  a striking  likeness  to  the  viol  proper, 


THE  GENESIS  OF  THE  VIOLIN 


233 


in  spite  of  its  rectangular  frame  (see  Figs.  49-50).  Important 
influence  doubtless  came  from  some  Oriental  forms,  but  pre- 
cisely which  of  them  and  when  is  not  certain.  In  the  16th 
century  every  effort  to  improve  the  lute  reacted  on  the  viol, 
and  the  early  makers  of  the  latter  were  generally  luthiers. 
Yet  the  critical  difference  of  the  viol  as  to  the  method  of  sound- 
ing tended  always  to  keep  the  number  of  the  strings  small 
and  decidedly  to  modify  its  outer  contour. 

A few  of  the  transitional  steps  may  here  be  noted.  The  mediaeval 
‘ vielle  1 or  ‘ fiddle  1 had  a body  more  or  less  pear-shaped,  following  that 
of  the  Troubadour  rebec.  In  the  15th  century  more  than  one  size  began 
to  be  made,  so  as  to  imitate  the  parts  of  the  vocal  choir.  Naturally  the 
tenor  size  was  held  to  be  typical,  and  to  this  the  name  ‘ viola 1 was 
especially  attached.  (Hence  later  the  treble  or  discant  viol  was  called 
‘ violino 1 or  ‘ little  viola,1  and  the  bass,  ‘ violone 1 or  ‘ big  viola 1 ; while 
still  later  come  the  term  ‘ violoncello  1 or  ‘ small  big  viola.1  Similarly 
‘viola  da  braccio1  or  ‘arm-viola1  and  ‘viola  da  gamba1  or  ‘ leg- viola  1 
were  designations  both  of  size  and  of  position  in  playing.) 

The  larger  the  viol,  the  greater  the  need  of  providing  means  of  free 
access  to  the  strings  for  the  bow  and  of  augmenting  the  strength  and 
rigidity  of  the  body.  The  true  violin  type  appeared  only  when  the  out- 
line of  the  body  was  broken  by  a ‘ waist 1 with  corners  reinforced  within  by 
blocks.  Probably  before  this,  that  is,  early  in  the  16th  century,  decided 
gains  had  been  made  in  details  — in  shaping  the  bridge,  in  fixing  it  upon 
. a soundpost,  and  in  settling  the  place  and  form  of  the  longitudinal  bass- 
bar.  But  the  models  were  still  relatively  thick  from  front  to  back,  had 
flat  backs,  sloping  shoulders  and  very  variable  contours,  and  the  shape 
and  placing  of  the  soundholes  were  capricious.  In  the  typical  viol  the 
fingerboard  was  provided  with  frets,  as  in  the  lute,  but  in  the  violin  these 
were  ultimately  discarded. 

Besides  the  three  or  four  standard  sizes  of  the  viol  proper,  experiments 
were  tried  with  more  complicated  forms,  such  as  the  ‘ lyra 1 in  several  sizes, 
which  was  double-strung  and  required  a broad,  high -arched  bridge,  and 
the  ‘ viola  d1  amore,1  also  in  more  than  one  size,  which  had  from  seven  to 
many  sympathetic  strings  of  metal  under  or  beside  the  fingerboard.  Some 
of  these  transitional  forms  remained  in  use  till  about  1800,  but  they  were 
steadily  being  replaced  by  the  true  violin. 

The  perfected  violin-model  presents  many  points  of  technical 
interest,  which  cannot  be  briefly  described.  Every  detail  has 
been  exhaustively  studied,  and  the  results  of  small  variations  in 
form  and  adjustment  are  fully  understood.  The  genius  of  the 
great  makers  lay  in  gradually  conquering  every  problem  involved, 
and  then  in  perfecting  one  of  the  several  possible  combinations 
of  the  factors.  While  adhering  to  the  certain  broad  lines  of 


234 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


Fig.  70. — Violin-Making  — 
the  linings  and  unfinished  bass- 
bar. 

FIG.  71.  — Violin-Making  — 
neck  and  head,  ribs,  linings 
and  corner-blocks,  bass-bar  and 
soundpost. 

Fig.  72.  — Violin-Making  — 
completed  instrument. 

Fig.  73.  — Stradivari  Violin 
(1679)  — side  view,  showing 
contours,  scroll  and  inlaid  orna- 
mentation (from  Hipkins). 

Fig.  74.  — The  same  — front 
view,  showing  contours,  /Wholes 
and  inlaid  purfling. 


Fig.  73. 


Fig.  72. 


Fig.  74. 


# 


THE  GREAT  VIOLIN-MAKERS 


235 


construction  that  are  common  to  all,  each  maker  had  marked 
individuality  of  method  and  often  applied  his  own  method  in 
peculiar  or  unique  ways.  It  is  certainly  most  remarkable,  how- 
ever, that  in  the  main  the  art  of  violin-making  reached  a culmi- 
nation so  long  ago  as  1700  which  seems  to  be  unsurpassable. 

The  niceties  of  the  art  include  not  only  the  choice  and  proper  season- 
ing of  the  woods  for  every  part  and  the  minute  determination  of  the  shape, 
size  and  placing  of  the  nearly  60  pieces,  with  their  perfect  modeling,  join- 
ing and  gluing,  but  the  very  important  treatment  of  the  whole  with  beauti- 
ful varnishes  and  the  decoration  of  the  head  with  its  carved  ‘scroll1  and  of 
the  edges  of  the  back  with  ‘ purfling.1  Critical  attention  is  required  for 
the  location  of  the  soundholes  and  of  the  soundpost,  since  these  deter- 
mine the  centre  and  character  of  the  vibrations  transmitted  from  the 
strings  through  the  bridge  to  the  body.  Individuality  is  shown  in  the 
quality  of  tone  secured  and  in  the  grace  and  harmony  of  the  outlines,  the 
one  appealing  to  the  ear,  the  other  to  the  eye.  Similar  niceties  enter 
into  the  making  of  the  bow  by  which  the  strings  are  sounded  (see  sec. 
149). 

111.  The  Great  Violin-Makers.  — The  evolution  of  the  violin 
took  place  between  the  middle  of  the  16th  century  and  the  first 
third  of  the  18th,  culminating  with  the  work  of  geniuses  like 
Stradivari  and  Guarneri.  The  chief  makers  worked  at  Brescia 
or  Cremona  in  northern  Italy  — a region  offering  superb  mate- 
rials, established  traditions  in  fine  instrument-making,  and  near- 
ness to  Venice,  then  the  headquarters  for  artistic  secular  music. 
Bavaria,  Austria  and  the  Tyrol  also  had  able  masters,  and  their 
disciples  gradually  became  frequent  throughout  western  Europe. 
Many  instances  occur  of  families  of  makers  whose  skill  descended 
from  generation  to  generation,  since  success  in  the  art  depended 
on  the  inheritance  not  only  of  patterns  and  models,  but  of  deli- 
cate manipulation. 

Several  makers  are  often  named  in  the  early  16th  century  and  even  in  the 
15th,  but  it  is  doubtful  whether  any  true  violins  much  antedate  1550,  though 
artistic  viols  were  common. 

At  Brescia  the  most  noted  names  are  Gasparo  da  Salb  [Bertalotti]  (d.  1609), 
perhaps  the  first  to  note  the  value  of  the  corners,  who  had  many  pupils,  though 
his  relation  to  the  Cremonese  makers  is  not  clear ; Giovanni  Paolo  Maggini 
(d.  c.  1640),  pupil  of  Da  Salo,  specially  successful  with  the  larger  viols  and 
with  violins  of  a full,  rich  tone ; and  his  son  Pietro  Maggini  (d.  c.  1680),  often 
quite  his  father’s  equal. 

At  Cremona  the  great  makers  are  more  numerous  and  renowned.  First 
stands  the  Amati  family,  especially  Andrea  (d.  1611),  his  two  sons  Antonio  and 


236 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


Fig.  76. 


Fig.  75.  — Viola  da  Gamba  and  Alto  Viol— the  lat- 
ter called  in  France  ‘ haute  contre.  ’ 

Fig.  76.  — Viola  d’Amore.with  sympathetic  strings. 
Fig.  77.  — Pochettes  — miniature  or  pocket  vio- 
lins, often  used  by  dancing-masters. 


THE  GREAT  VIOLIN-MAKERS 


237 


Geronimo  (d.  1638,  1635),  and  the  noted  son  of  the  latter,  Nicola  (d.  1684), 
all  of  whom  generally  preferred  a small  model  and  sought  sweetness  of  tone 
more  than  power  or  brilliance,  though  Nicola’s  ‘grand  1 pattern  is  of  the  high- 
est rank.  Greatest  among  their  successors,  probably  Nicola’s  pupil,  was 
Antonio  Stradivari  (d.  1737),  whose  style  had  several  stages,  the  best  of  which 
extended  about  a quarter-century  from  1700,  and  whose  achievements  then, 
both  as  to  refinement  and  brilliancy  of  tone,  and  as  to  grace  of  form,  mark  the 
acme  of  the  art  — with  his  sons  Francesco  and  Omobono  (d.  1743,  1742).  The 
Guarneri  family  includes  Pietro  Andrea  (working  till  c.  1695),  his  son  Giuseppe 
(till  1730),  his  grandson  Pietro  and  his  nephew  Giuseppe  Antonio  (d.  c.  1745), 
usually  called  ‘ del  Gesu 1 (from  his  use  of  ‘ I.  H.  S.’  on  his  labels),  whose  best 
work  equals  Stradivari’s.  The  Ruggeri  family,  beginning  with  Francesco  (d. 
1720),  probably  a pupil  of  Nicola  Amati,  includes  Giovanni  Battista  (till  1723), 
with  several  others.  Among  Stradivari’s  pupils  were  Carlo  Bergonzi  (d.  1755), 
and  Lorenzo  Guadagnini  (till  1740),  with  his  son  Giovanni  Battista  (d.  1786) 
and  other  descendants.  In  the  Guarneri  line  was  Lorenzo  Storioni  (d.  1799). 
Later  Cremonese  makers  of  note  were  the  Ceruti  family  and  others,  reaching 
far  into  the  19th  century. 

From  Cremona  the  developed  art  passed  to  other  places.  Thus  in  Pied- 
mont was  Gotofredo  Cappa  (till  1640),  whose  instruments  are  often  confused 
with  those  of  the  Amatis.  At  Milan  were  Paolo  Grancino  (till  1692),  and  his 
son  Giovanni  (till  1720),  with  others  of  the  same  family,  representing  Amati 
traditions;  and  Carlo  Giuseppe  Testore  (till  1720),  and  his  sons,  followers  of 
Guarneri.  At  Venice  were  Francesco  Gobetti  (till  1715)  ; Domenico  Montagna 
(till  c.  1740),  a pupil  of  Stradivari ; and  Santo  Serafino  (till  1748),  famous  for 
the  beauty  of  his  varnish  and  finish.  At  Naples  the  Gagliano  family,  begin- 
ning with  Alessandro  (till  1730)  and  continuing  for  two  or  three  generations, 
upheld  for  a time  the  Stradivari  tradition.  The  same  derivation  is  still  clearer 
in  Vincenzo  Panormo  (d.  1813),  who  worked  first  at  Palermo  and  later  at  Paris 
and  London.  Still  another  of  the  same  school  was  Giovanni  Francesco  Pres- 
senda  (d.  1854)  of  Turin. 

Violin-making  of  an  advanced  type  did  not  begin  in  South  Germany  until 
far  into  the  17th  century,  though  lutes  and  viols  were  manufactured  with  sin- 
gular ingenuity.  Of  the  many  makers  who  then  appeared  the  most  original 
was  Jakob  Stainer  (d.  1683),  a Tyrolese  who  studied  with  the  Amatis  and 
whose  violins  now  rank  only  second  to  those  of  the  best  Cremonese  artists. 
Matthias  Albani  (d.  1673),  a^so  a Tyrolese,  was  one  of  Stainer’s  best  pupils, 
and  his  son  Matthias  (d.  after  1709)  studied  at  Cremona  and  finally  worked  at 
Rome.  David  Tecchler  (d.  1743),  coming  to  Rome  from  Salzburg,  strength- 
ened his  style  by  incorporating  Italian  features. 

Among  the  closest  students  and  cleverest  imitators  of  the  great  Italians 
have  been  some  Dutch  and  many  French  makers.  Leading  names  are  Peeter 
Jacobs  (d.  1740)  of  Amsterdam,  whose  work  follows  that  of  Nicola  Amati; 
and  Nicholas  Lupot  (d.1824),  the  chief  of  a large  Parisian  family  that  followed 
Stradivari.  Other  well-known  Parisian  makers  are  F.  L.  Pigue  (d.  1822), 
Pierre  Silvestre  (d.  1859),  who  settled  finally  at  Lyons,  and  J.  B.  Vuillaume 
(d.  1875),  whose  instruments  are  extremely  many. 


238 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


Violin-making  in  England  began  early  and  was  at  first  more  indebted  to 
German  than  to  Italian  influence.  Prominent  names  are  Benjamin  Banks  of 
Salisbury  (d.  1795),  Richard  Duke  (till  1780),  Charles  Harris  (c.  1800),  Wil- 
liam Forster  (d.  1807),  and  several  descendants,  Bernhard  Fendt  (d.  1832),  a 
Tyrolese,  and  his  sons,  and  John  Frederick  Lott  (d.  1853). 

112.  Early  Violin  Music  and  Violinists.  — The  rapid  improve- 
ment of  the  violin  and  its  larger  relatives  was  due  to  the  recog- 
nition of  their  remarkable  artistic  possibilities.  These  lay  in 
two  directions,  concerted  or  orchestral  combinations  and  solo 
effects.  The  more  these  were  appreciated  and  the  better  be- 
came the  instruments  themselves,  the  greater  was  the  stimulus 
to  composers  to  devise  and  work  out  special  effects,  and  to 
players  to  overcome  the  technical  difficulties  involved.  The 
17th  century,  therefore,  witnessed  the  foundation  of  violin  music 
and  violin-playing,  using  both  terms  in  the  wide  sense  that  in- 
cludes all  bowed  instruments. 

In  the  later  16th  century  manifold  experiments  had  been 
made  with  strange  aggregations  of  instruments  for  concerted 
effect.  All  these  lacked  a settled  principle  of  organization. 
But  with  the  rise  of  the  opera,  particularly  under  Monteverdi 
(himself  a violist  of  long  experience),  the  true  orchestra  began 
to  take  shape  with  viols  of  different  grades  constituting  almost 
half  the  total  force.  For  more  than  a century  further,  however, 
solidity  of  harmonic  structure  was  secured  by  the  almost  con- 
stant use  of  the  harpsichord,  though  more  and  more  the  viol- 
quartet  was  pushed  into  the  foreground.  The  complete 
emancipation  of  the  orchestra  as  a body  of  solo  instruments  was 
delayed  until  after  1750. 

It  is  instructive  to  compare  the  make-up  of  orchestras  at  different  peri- 
ods. As  early  as  1565  we  hear  of  accompaniments  for  intermezzi  in 
which  7 viols  contended  with  three  or  four  times  as  many  wind  instru- 
ments and  2 harpsichords.  In  1600  Peri  did  not  use  viols  for  i the  first 
opera,1  and  Cavaliere  only  one  for  ‘ the  first  oratorio.1  Butin  1608  Mon- 
teverdi in  his  opera  Orfeo  employed  16  viols  (including  2 violins)  with  14 
wind  instruments,  a harp,  2 large  lutes  and  2 harpsichords.  Late  in  the 
century  works  by  Legrenzi,  Lully  and  A.  Scarlatti  show  a preponderance 
of  bowed  instruments,  often  with  clear  signs  that  the  value  of  the  string- 
quartet  as  a nucleus  was  appreciated,  if  not  always  consistently  maintained. 
In  the  1 8th  century  Bach  and  Handel  applied  the  orchestra  in  very 
different  ways,  each  for  his  own  purposes,  but  they  contributed  little  to  the 
settling  of  the  modern  orchestra  on  its  present  lines.  It  remained  for 
Haydn  and  Mozart  to  make  a permanently  satisfactory  adjustment. 


EARLY  VIOLIN  MUSIC 


239 


Prior  to  about  1650  there  was  little  consensus  as  to  the  forms 
in  which  purely  instrumental  music  should  be  written,  though  iso- 
lated works  showed  thought  and  skill.  After  that  date  composers 
tended  to  apply  the  term  ‘ sonata  ’ to  pieces  for  a small  group  of 
instruments  or  for  a solo  instrument  with  accompaniment.  Two 
varieties  were  distinguished,  the  ‘ sonata  da  chiesa,’  usually  con- 
sisting of  a slow,  stately  introduction,  a quick  fugal  movement, 
a flowing  melodic  section,  and  finally  a lively,  dashing  movement, 
all  treated  with  considerable  contrapuntal  detail;  and  the  ‘sonata 
da  camera,’  which  was  practically  a set  of  dances,  the  selection 
and  order  varying,  though  with  a tendency  toward  the  later  plan 
of,  first,  pavan  or  allemande,  second,  coranto,  third,  sarabande,  and 
fourth,  gigue,  all  treated  with  emphasis  on  some  metric  figure 
and  on  brilliant  touches  of  executive  effect.  Thus  instrumental 
composition  worked  itself  free  from  the  old  imitation  of  vocal 
styles  and  launched  out  into  forms  that  were  perfectly  suited  to 
the  instruments  used.  We  cannot  name  precisely  the  pioneers 
in  these  innovations,  since  many  minds  worked  upon  the  problem. 

The  germs  of  the  later  styles  appeared  somewhat  before  1600  in  works  by 
G.  Gabrieli,  the  Venetian  organist,  and  from  1620,  violin  solos  were  attempted, 
with  stringed  chamber  music  soon  after.  It  is  conjectured  that  some  important 
composers  of  this  period  may  have  been  forgotten,  since  later  works  imply  so 
much  of  settled  procedure.  Among  the  known  names  are  these  : — 

Carlo  Farina,  a Mantuan  at  the  Saxon  court,  published  (1626-8)  5 sets 
of  chamber-pieces,  interesting  for  their  attempts  at  imitative  effects  or  tone- 
painting. Marco  Uccellini  of  Modena  followed  (from  1639)  in  a stronger  style. 
Still  abler  was  Massimiliano  Neri,  organist  at  St.  Mark’s,  Venice  (works  from 
1644),  who  may  have  been  the  first  to  distinguish  between  the  two  kinds  of 
sonata.  Legrenzi  (d.  1690),  the  eminent  Venetian,  not  only  strengthened  the 
orchestra,  but  wrote  valuable  chamber-sonatas  (from  1655).  Further  advance 
was  made  by  Giovanni  Battista  Vitali  (d.  1692),  violist  at  Bologna  from 
1666  and  choirmaster  at  Modena  from  1674  (chamber-works  from  1666); 
Tommaso  Vitali,  his  son,  one  of  the  best  violinists  of  the  time,  with  striking 
sonatas  (from  1693)  ; and  G.  B.  Bassani  (d.  1716),  the  vocal  composer  of 
Bologna  and  Ferrara,  a notable  player  and  composer  for  strings  (from  1677). 

Arcangelo  Corelli  (d.  1713),  born  near  Imolain  1653  and  a pupil  of  Bassani, 
after  some  years  in  Germany,  before  1 685  became  the  protege  of  Cardinal  Ottoboni 
at  Rome,  where  he  won  immense  renown  as  violinist,  composer  and  teacher, 
in  spite  of  his  simplicity  and  modesty.  His  extant  works  (from  1683)  are  not 
many  and  from  a modern  point  of  view  not  ambitious,  but  they  show  that  he 
was  an  artist  of  true  feeling,  a skillful  consolidator  of  style  rather  than  an  in- 
novator, and  with  real  insight  into  the  genius  of  his  instrument.  From  him 
has  developed  by  direct  artistic  descent  a long  line  of  violin  masters  of  the 
greatest  significance. 


240 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


Giuseppe  Torelli  (d.  1708),  self-taught  at  Bologna  and  long  violinist  there, 
but  after  1696  at  Ansbach,  was  not  only  a close  contemporary  of  Corelli,  but 
with  him  was  instrumental  in  defining  the  1 concerto  1 and  the  ‘ concerto  grosso  1 
— forms  in  which  either  a solo  violin  ora  solo  group  is  thrown  into  contrast 
with  a concerted  accompaniment. 

Other  Italian  writers  in  the  first  half  of  the  century  were  Biagio  Marini  (d. 
c.  1660),  who  worked  variously  in  Italy  and  Germany  (works  from  1617,  in- 
cluding much  vocal  music)  ; Giovanni  Battista  Fontana  (d.  1630)  of  Brescia 
and  elsewhere  in  Italy,  with  a few  pieces  (1641)  ; and  Tarquinio  Merula  of 
Bergamo  and  Cremona  (chamber-works  from  1626,  besides  madrigals  and 
motets  from  1615).  In  the  second  half,  were  Carlo  Ambrogio  Marini  of  Ber- 
gamo (many  works  from  1687)  ; Bartolomeo  Girolamo  Laurenti  (d.  1726)  of 
Bologna  (works  from  1691);  Antonio  Veracini  of  Florence  (works  from 
1692)  ; and  the  fertile  opera-writer  Tommaso  Albinoni  (d.  1745)  of  Venice 
(many  works  from  1699?). 

It  will  be  noted  that  all  these,  except  Corelli,  belong  to  northern  Italy. 

In  Germany,  though  writing  for  bowed  instruments  was  some- 
what abundant  during  the  second  half  of  the  century,  especially 
in  dance-forms  and  accompaniments  for  vocal  works,  no  com- 
manding master  or  historically  important  style  was  developed. 

Almost  all  the  works  produced  were  sets  of  dances,  representative  com- 
posers being  Briegel  of  Darmstadt  (d.  1712),  a very  facile  writer  (works 
from  1652);  Nikolaus  Hasse  of  Rostock  (1656)  ; Johann  Heinrich  Schmel- 
zer  (d.  1680),  from  1649  a player  in  the  Imperial  Chapel  at  Vienna  and  from 
1679  choirmaster,  with  chamber  music  (from  1662)  and  many  ballets  for 
operas;  Johann  Pezel  of  Leipsic,  notably  industrious  (from  1670)  in  writ- 
ing for  various  combinations  of  instruments,  both  bowed  and  wind ; Hein- 
rich Franz  von  Biber  (d.  1704),  court-musician  at  Kremsier  (Moravia)  and 
from  1675  at  Salzburg,  whose  works  (from  1673)  rank  fairly  with  those 
of  the  Italians ; Johann  Jakob  Walther  of  Dresden,  an  ingenious  player, 
very  celebrated  in  his  time,  but  not  a remarkable  composer  (works  from 
1676) ; Johann  Schenk  of  Diisseldorf  and  Amsterdam,  a noted  gambist, 
with  works  for  the  gamba  (from  1685)  ; and  Strunck  (d.  1700),  the  Ham- 
burg opera-writer  (see  sec.  87),  whose  playing  won  Corelli’s  admiration 
and  honors  from  several  courts  (sonatas,  1691,  mostly  lost). 

In  France  interest  in  pure  chamber  music  was  not  usually 
dissociated  from  that  in  the  orchestral  side  of  the  opera.  Con- 
certed suites  of  dances  were  frequent,  but  developed  more  as 
parts  of  operas  than  as  independent  works.  The  operatic  over- 
ture also  became  steadily  more  significant,  being  laid  out  in 
three  or  four  distinct  movements.  These  two  instrumental 
styles  were  essentially  analogous  to  the  two  kinds  of  Italian 
sonata.  In  them  progress  tended  gradually  toward  clearness, 


EARLY  VIOLIN  MUSIC 


241 


interest  and  artistic  organization  of  detail  and  plan.  In  all  this 
the  influence  of  Lully  was  dominant,  and  radiated  more  or  less 
into  Germany  and  England. 

It  is  to  be  remembered  that  Lully  (d.  1687)  first  won  recognition  at 
Paris  as  a violinist  about  1650  and  that  his  works  began  soon  after  (see 
sec.  85).  He  was  most  successful  with  his  overtures,  which  were  usually 
laid  out  with  a slow,  massive  first  movement,  then  a lively  fugal  move- 
ment, then  a melodious  slow  movement.  Mention  should  also  be  made  of 
Marin  Marais  (d.  1728),  an  extraordinary  gambist,  in  the  royal  orchestra 
for  40  years  from  1685,  with  much  gamba  and  chamber  music  (from  1686), 
and  Jean  Rousseau,  author  on  and  composer  for  the  gamba  at  Paris  (1687). 
Nicolas  a Kempis,  organist  at  Brussels,  put  forth  chamber-works  as  early  as 
1644. 

In  England  the  established  national  zeal  for  secular  vocal 
music  passed  over  more  or  less  into  a care  for  instrumental 
works,  especially  late  in  the  century.  Several  composers  ex- 
perimented with  concerted  pieces  even  before  the  Common- 
wealth, resuming  with  zest  after  it.  Early  pieces  were  often 
called  ‘ fancies,’  which  were  somewhat  contrapuntal  fantasias, 
generally  of  slight  value,  but  better  suites  of  dances  were  com- 
mon after  1660.  No  single  composer  of  chamber  music  be- 
came historically  eminent,  but  the  diffused  interest  is  to  be  noted 
as  illustrating  the  tendency  of  musical  thought. 

Many  writers  elsewhere  named  (secs.  88,  89,  99)  put  forth  chamber  music, 
from  0.  Gibbons  (d.  1625)  and  W.  Lawes  (d.  1645)  to  Rogers  (d.  1698)  and 
H.  Purcell  (d.  1695).  Mention  may  also  be  made  of  Christopher  Simpson 
(d.  c.  1677),  a good  gambist,  with  several  instruction-books  (from  1659)  ; 
John  Jenkins  (d.  1678),  a lutist  and  violist,  teaching  before  the  Civil  War  and 
in  the  royal  band  after  1662,  with  much  chamber  music  (from  1660),  includ- 
ing sonatas,  fancies  and  ‘rants’  (dance-tunes)  ; John  Banister,  Sr.  (d.  1679), 
called  the  first  significant  English  violinist,  who  left  the  royal  band  because 
of  friction  with  the  French  players  in  it,  afterward  a teacher  and  the  leader 
of  public  concerts  (perhaps  the  first  in  England)  ; his  son  John  Banister, 
Jr.  (d.  1735),  violinist  from  1668  to  Charles  II.,  James  II.  and  Queen  Anne, 
and  concertmaster  at  the  opera  (works  from  1688)  ; and  Nicola  Matteis, 
an  Italian  settled  in  London  (works  from  1687). 

It  should  be  added  that  the  strong  16th-century  interest  in  the 
lute  and  theorbo,  both  as  solo  instruments  and  as  parts  of  con- 
certed combinations,  continued  to  some  extent  into  the  17th, 
and  that  lute-books  were  still  issued  from  time  to  time.  But  the 
developing  family  of  viols  steadily  supplanted  these  older  and 
feebler  instruments. 


R 


240 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


Giuseppe  Torelli  (d.  1708),  self-taught  at  Bologna  and  long  violinist  there, 
but  after  1696  at  Ansbach,  was  not  only  a close  contemporary  of  Corelli,  but 
with  him  was  instrumental  in  defining  the  ‘ concerto  ’ and  the  ‘ concerto  grosso  1 
— forms  in  which  either  a solo  violin  ora  solo  group  is  thrown  into  contrast 
with  a concerted  accompaniment. 

Other  Italian  writers  in  the  first  half  of  the  century  were  Biagio  Marini  (d. 
c.  1660),  who  worked  variously  in  Italy  and  Germany  (works  from  1617,  in- 
cluding much  vocal  music)  ; Giovanni  Battista  Fontana  (d.  1630)  of  Brescia 
and  elsewhere  in  Italy,  with  a few  pieces  (1641)  ; and  Tarquinio  Merula  of 
Bergamo  and  Cremona  (chamber-works  from  1626,  besides  madrigals  and 
motets  from  1615).  In  the  second  half,  were  Carlo  Ambrogio  Marini  of  Ber- 
gamo (many  works  from  1687)  ; Bartolomeo  Girolamo  Laurenti  (d.  1726)  of 
Bologna  (works  from  1691);  Antonio  Veracini  of  Florence  (works  from 
1692)  ; and  the  fertile  opera-writer  Tommaso  Albinoni  (d.  1745)  of  Venice 
(many  works  from  1699?). 

It  will  be  noted  that  all  these,  except  Corelli,  belong  to  northern  Italy. 

In  Germany,  though  writing  for  bowed  instruments  was  some- 
what abundant  during  the  second  half  of  the  century,  especially 
in  dance-forms  and  accompaniments  for  vocal  works,  no  com- 
manding master  or  historically  important  style  was  developed. 

Almost  all  the  works  produced  were  sets  of  dances,  representative  com- 
posers being  Briegel  of  Darmstadt  (d.  1712),  a very  facile  writer  (works 
from  1652)  ; Nikolaus  Hasse  of  Rostock  (1656)  ; Johann  Heinrich  Schmel- 
zer  (d.  1680),  from  1649  a player  in  the  Imperial  Chapel  at  Vienna  and  from 
1679  choirmaster,  with  chamber  music  (from  1662)  and  many  ballets  for 
operas;  Johann  Pezel  of  Leipsic,  notably  industrious  (from  1670)  in  writ- 
ing for  various  combinations  of  instruments,  both  bowed  and  wind ; Hein- 
rich Franz  von  Biber  (d.  1704),  court-musician  at  Kremsier  (Moravia)  and 
from  1675  at  Salzburg,  whose  works  (from  1673)  rank  fairly  with  those 
of  the  Italians ; Johann  Jakob  Walther  of  Dresden,  an  ingenious  player, 
very  celebrated  in  his  time,  but  not  a remarkable  composer  (works  from 
1 676) ; Johann  Schenk  of  Diisseldorf  and  Amsterdam,  a noted  gambist, 
with  works  for  the  gamba  (from  1685)  ; and  Strunck  (d.  1700),  the  Ham- 
burg opera-writer  (see  sec.  87),  whose  playing  won  Corelli’s  admiration 
and  honors  from  several  courts  (sonatas,  1691,  mostly  lost). 

In  France  interest  in  pure  chamber  music  was  not  usually 
dissociated  from  that  in  the  orchestral  side  of  the  opera.  Con- 
certed suites  of  dances  were  frequent,  but  developed  more  as 
parts  of  operas  than  as  independent  works.  The  operatic  over- 
ture also  became  steadily  more  significant,  being  laid  out  in 
three  or  four  distinct  movements.  These  two  instrumental 
styles  were  essentially  analogous  to  the  two  kinds  of  Italian 
sonata.  In  them  progress  tended  gradually  toward  clearness, 


EARLY  VIOLIN  MUSIC 


241 


interest  and  artistic  organization  of  detail  and  plan.  In  all  this 
the  influence  of  Lully  was  dominant,  and  radiated  more  or  less 
into  Germany  and  England. 

It  is  to  be  remembered  that  Lully  (d.  1687)  first  won  recognition  at 
Paris  as  a violinist  about  1650  and  that  his  works  began  soon  after  (see 
sec.  85).  He  was  most  successful  with  his  overtures,  which  were  usually 
laid  out  with  a slow,  massive  first  movement,  then  a lively  fugal  move- 
ment, then  a melodious  slow  movement.  Mention  should  also  be  made  of 
Marin  Marais  (d.  1728),  an  extraordinary  gambist,  in  the  royal  orchestra 
for  40  years  from  1685,  with  much  gamba  and  chamber  music  (from  1686), 
and  Jean  Rousseau,  author  on  and  composer  for  the  gamba  at  Paris  (1687). 
Nicolas  a Kempis,  organist  at  Brussels,  put  forth  chamber-works  as  early  as 
1644. 

In  England  the  established  national  zeal  for  secular  vocal 
music  passed  over  more  or  less  into  a care  for  instrumental 
works,  especially  late  in  the  century.  Several  composers  ex- 
perimented with  concerted  pieces  even  before  the  Common- 
wealth, resuming  with  zest  after  it.  Early  pieces  were  often 
called  ‘fancies,’  which  were  somewhat  contrapuntal  fantasias, 
generally  of  slight  value,  but  better  suites  of  dances  were  com- 
mon after  1660.  No  single  composer  of  chamber  music  be- 
came historically  eminent,  but  the  diffused  interest  is  to  be  noted 
as  illustrating  the  tendency  of  musical  thought. 

Many  writers  elsewhere  named  (secs.  88,  89,  99)  put  forth  chamber  music, 
from  0.  Gibbons  (d.  1625)  and  W.  Lawes  (d.  1645)  to  Rogers  (d.  1698)  and 
H.  Purcell  (d.  1695).  Mention  may  also  be  made  of  Christopher  Simpson 
(d.  c.  1677),  a good  gambist,  with  several  instruction-books  (from  1659); 
John  Jenkins  (d.  1678),  a lutist  and  violist,  teaching  before  the  Civil  War  and 
in  the  royal  band  after  1662,  with  much  chamber  music  (from  1660),  includ- 
ing sonatas,  fancies  and  ‘rants’  (dance-tunes)  ; John  Banister,  Sr.  (d.  1679), 
called  the  first  significant  English  violinist,  who  left  the  royal  band  because 
of  friction  with  the  French  players  in  it,  afterward  a teacher  and  the  leader 
of  public  concerts  (perhaps  the  first  in  England)  ; his  son  John  Banister, 
Jr.  (d.  1735),  violinist  from  1668  to  Charles  II.,  James  II.  and  Queen  Anne, 
and  concertmaster  at  the  opera  (works  from  1688)  ; and  Nicola  Matteis, 
an  Italian  settled  in  London  (works  from  1687). 

It  should  be  added  that  the  strong  16th-century  interest  in  the 
lute  and  theorbo,  both  as  solo  instruments  and  as  parts  of  con- 
certed combinations,  continued  to  some  extent  into  the  17th, 
and  that  lute-books  were  still  issued  from  time  to  time.  But  the 
developing  family  of  viols  steadily  supplanted  these  older  and 
feebler  instruments. 


u 


242 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


113.  Literature  about  Music.  — The  growth  of  intellectual  in- 
terest in  music,  which  began  so  fruitfully  in  the  16th  century, 
was  maintained  and  increased  in  the  17th.  The  widespread 
teaching  of  practical  music  called  forth  numerous  manuals  and 
text-books,  with  several  philosophical  treatises  on  composition, 
instruments  and  performance.  The  instinct  for  historical  in- 
vestigation grew  stronger  and  more  productive,  and  the  drafting 
of  dictionaries  and  similar  compendiums  began.  Scholarship 
busied  itself  still  further  with  questions  of  ancient  musical 
theory,  assisted  now  by  notable  republications  of  Greek  treatises. 
Musical  acoustics  appeared  as  a specialty,  though  its  strong 
development  was  deferred  till  the  18th  century.  In  these  varied 
lines  of  study  and  literary  production  all  the  leading  countries 
participated  more  equally  than  before,  England  now  taking  her 
place  with  the  rest. 

No  exhaustive  catalogue  of  works  will  be  attempted,  only  a rapid 
enumeration  of  those  temporarily  or  permanently  influential.  For  con- 
venience, the  century  will  be  taken  up  in  two  parts.  The  usual  language 
is  still  Latin,  but  other  languages  begin  to  be  used  with  freedom. 

Technical  manuals  of  varying  scope  during  the  first  years  of  the  century 
were  issued  in  1598  by  Orazio  Scaletta  of  Padua  (d.  1630);  from  1601  by 
Scipione  Cerreto  of  Naples  ; in  1606-10  by  Antonio  Brunelli  of  Florence ; in 
1611-3  by  Johann  Heinrich  Alstedt  of  Herborn  (d.  1638),  who  also  wrote 
encyclopaedia  articles;  in  1611  by  C.  T.  Walliser  of  Strassburg  (d.  1648); 
in  1618  by  Giovanni  Battista  Rossi  of  Genoa ; in  1618  by  Thomas  Campion  of 
London  (d.  1620)  ; in  1620  by  Francesco  Rognoni-Taegio  of  Milan ; in  1626  by 
Arauxo  of  Seville  (d.  1663)  ; and  in  1626,  on  solmization,  by  Nikolaus 
Gengenbach  of  Zeitz.  An  early  exposition  of  figured  bass  (1607)  was  by 
Agostino  Agazzari  (d.  1640)  of  Rome  and  from  1630  at  Siena,  who  also  wrote 
(1638)  on  church  music  in  the  light  of  the  action  of  the  Council  of  Trent. 
The  earliest  treatise  on  conducting  as  a specialty  (1611)  was  by  Agostino  Pisa 
of  Rome.  Georg  Leopold  Fuhrmann  of  Nuremberg  wrote  upon  the  lute  and 
its  music  (1615).  Erycus  Puteanus  [Hendrik  van  Put]  (d.  1646),  from  1607 
professor  in  Louvain  University,  issued  two  or  three  works  (1599-1602)  in 
which  history  and  theory  mingled.  He  opposed  solmization. 

Adriano  Banchieri  (d.  1634),  the  eminent  organist  and  composer  of  Bologna, 
treated  importantly  of  organ-playing  and  composition  (1601-28).  Domenico 
Pietro  Cerone  (d.  after  1613),  for  about  15  years  at  Madrid  and  from  about 
1608  at  Naples,  issued  two  theoretical  treatises  (1609-13),  the  latter  contain- 
ing almost  1200  closely  printed  pages  — now  known  only  by  a few  copies. 
Heinrich  Baryphonus  [Pipegrop]  of  Quedlinburg  (d.  1655)  wrote  extensively 
(from  1609?),  including  elaborate  mathematical  discussions,  many  now  lost. 

Michael  Pratorius  (d.  1621),  choirmaster  at  Wolfenbiittel  (see  sec.  95), 
was  the  most  important  writer  in  the  early  part  of  the  century.  His  Syntagma 


MUSICAL  LITERATURE 


243 


ntusicum  (3  vols.,  1615-19,  appendix,  ’20)  is  a mine  of  information.  Vol.  i. 
treats  of  sacred  music  from  the  earliest  times  and  of  ancient  music  in 
general;  Vol.  ii.,  of  every  kind  of  musical  instrument  then  in  use  or  his- 
torically known,  with  carefully  executed  illustrations  ; Vol.  iii.,  of  all  the 
recognized  forms  of  composition  and  of  technical  signs  and  terms,  with  details 
about  the  training  of  choirs  and  bands ; and  Vol.  iv.  (not  completed)  would 
have  discussed  the  whole  art  of  counterpoint.  In  scope  and  execution  this 
work  is  one  of  the  monuments  of  musical  scholarship. 

Marin  Mersenne  (d.  1648),  a monk  at  Paris,  pursued  similar  lines.  His 
Harmonie  universelle  (1627,  enlarged,  1636-7)  deals  with  acoustics,  singing, 
harmony  and  counterpoint,  instruments,  etc.  He  also  discussed  Hebrew 
music  (1623),  and  supplemented  his  magnum  opus  by  several  lesser  works 
(1634-48). 

Johann  Criiger  (d.  1662),  for  40  years  at  Berlin  (see  sec.  95),  published 
several  useful  treatises  on  composition  (from  1624?),  besides  important 
chorale-collections  (from  1640). 

Notable  among  works  on  ancient  music  were  those  (from  1635)  of  Giovanni 
Battista  Doni  (d.  1647),  the  distinguished  Florentine.  Before  this,  Joannes 
Meursius  (d.  1639)  had  published  texts  by  Aristoxenos,  Nikomachos  and 
Alypios  (1616),  besides  writing  on  ancient  dancing  (1618).  The  monumental 
work  (1652)  of  Marcus  Meibom  of  Upsala  and  Utrecht  (d.  1 7 1 1)  gave  texts 
and  translations  of  Aristoxenos,  Euclid,  Nikomachos,  Gaudentios,  Bacchios, 
Aristides  Quintilianus  and  Capella.  At  intervals  followed  still  better  works 
by  John  Wallis  (d.  1703)  of  Oxford,  giving  texts  of  Ptolemy,  Porphyry  and 
Bryennios,  with  discussions  (1657-99). 

Athanasius  Kircher  (d.  1680),  a Jesuit  at  Rome,  put  forth  several  volumes 
(from  1641)  as  the  results  of  his  antiquarian  studies,  partly  valuable,  partly 
grotesque.  The  chief  of  these  was  the  Musurgia  (2  vols.,  1650),  treating  of 
ancient  music,  acoustics  and  general  composition.  Other  books  dealt  with 
the  medical  use  of  music,  Egyptian  music  and  still  further  with  acoustics. 
His  handling  of  ancient  music  was  sharply  challenged  by  Meibom. 

Technical  treatises  were  numerous  in  the  middle  and  later  parts  of  the 
century,  such  as  from  1640  by  Lorenz  Erhardi  of  Strassburg  and  Frankfort; 
in  1640-66  by  Otto  Gibel  of  Minden  (d.  1682)  ; in  1642-53  by  Johann  Andreas 
Herbst  of  Frankfort  and  Nuremberg  (d.  1666)  ; from  1646  by  G.  G.  Nivers  of 
Paris  (d.  after  1701)  ; in  1648  by  J.  R.  Ahle  ofMuhlhausen  (d.  1673)  ; from  1649 
by  King  Joao  IV.  (d.  1656)  ; posthumously  by  Gerhard  Johann  Voss  of  Leyden 
and  Amsterdam  (d.  1649)  ; in  1654  by  John  Playford  (d.  1693),  the  London 
publisher;  in  1657  by  Giovanni  d’Avella  of  Naples;  in  1658-67  by  Christo- 
pher Simpson  of  London  (d.  c.  1677)  ; in  1665-79  by  Jean  Jacques  Souhaitty 
of  Paris ; from  1656  by  Lorenzo  Penna  of  Mantua  and  Parma  (d.  1693)  ; in 
1673  by  Matthew  Locke  of  London  (d.  1677),  the  first  English  work  on 
figured  bass;  in  1673  by  G.  M.  Bononcini  of  Bologna  (d.  1678);  in  1673, 
also,  a notable  treatise  on  Plain-Song  by  Pierre  Benoit  de  Jumilhac  of 
Rheims  (d.  1682);  in  1681-93  by  Angelo  Berardi,  successively  of  Viterbo, 
Tivoli,  Spoleto  and  Rome  ; in  1683  by  Francesco  Gasparini  of  Venice  (d.  1727)  ; 
from  1687  by  J.  G.  Ahle  of  Miihlhausen  (d.  1706)  ; and  in  1696  by  Etienne 
Loulie  of  Paris. 


244 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


In  the  field  of  history,  church  music  was  extensively  treated  (1653-73)  by 
Cardinal  Giovanni  Bona  of  Rome  (d.  1674)  ; and  the  Meistersinger  by  Johann 
Christoph  Wagenseil  (d.  1708)  of  Altdorf  (in  his  History  of  Nuremberg, 
1697).  General  histories  were  attempted  in  1690  by  Wolfgang  Kaspar  Printz 
of  Sorau  (d.  1717),  and  in  1695  by  Giovanni  Andrea  Bontempi  of  Dresden 
(d.  1705),  both  of  whom  had  previously  written  on  composition;  and  MS. 
works  of  the  same  class  were  prepared  by  Liberati  (d.  after  1685)  and  by 
Pitone  (d.  1743),  both  of  Rome.  Some  lists  or  catalogues  giving  historical 
data  were  issued,  as,  for  example,  an  account  of  13  Venetian  musicians  (1605) 
by  Giacomo  Alberici,  general  bibliographies  (1611-25)  by  Georg  Draud  (d.  c. 
1636),  an  important  catalogue  of  dramas  and  operas  (1666)  by  Leo  Allacci 
(d.  1669),  accounts  of  Milanese  writers  and  musicians  (1670)  by  Filippo 
Picinelli,  and  of  about  20  Brescian  composers  (1685)  by  Leonardo  Cozando. 
Thomas  Mace  (d.  1709)  of  Cambridge  published  (1676)  a quaint  book  on 
church  music,  the  lute  and  its  music,  viols,  etc. 

Sieur  Ducange  (d.  1688),  a Parisian  lawyer,  published  (1678)  a valuable 
glossary  of  mediaeval  Latin,  including  many  musical  terms ; and  Matthias 
Heinrich  Schacht  (d.  1700),  a Danish  scholar,  prepared  a dictionary  of  com- 
posers (1687),  which  Gerber  used  a century  later. 

Andreas  Werckmeister  (d.  1706),  the  able  organist  of  central  Germany, 
besides  his  works  on  the  organ  and  on  temperament,  issued  several  on  com- 
position (from  1686). 

Acoustical  questions  were  discussed  by  Salomon  de  Caus,  a Heidelberg 
architect  (1615)  ; by  Rene  Descartes  (d.  1650),  the  famous  mathematician  and 
philosopher,  in  his  treatise  on  music  (1618,  publ.  1650)  and  his  letters  (publ. 
1682-3);  by  Johann  Kepler  .(d.  1630),  the  great  astronomer  (1619);  by 
Mersenne  (from  1635),  Kircher  (from  1650),  Wallis  (from  1672)  and  Werck- 
meister (from  1687)  ; and  by  Daniele  Bartoli  (d.  1685).  Loulie  of  Paris 
invented  the  metronome  in  1696. 

To  the  important  collections  of  church  music  already  mentioned  may  be 
added  those  by  Abraham  Schade  (d.  c.  1617)  of  Speyer  (1611-7),  Berthold 
Spiridio  of  Bamberg  (1665),  besides  a guide  to  organ-playing,  etc.  (1670),  and 
by  Cardinal  Giuseppe  Maria  Tommasi  (d.  1713)  of  Rome  (1680-97). 

114.  Summary  of  the  Century.  — In  one  sense  the  17th 
century  presents  no  such  essential  novelty  as  the  16th,  since 
it  brought  no  further  revolution  in  the  fundamentals  of  com- 
position. Yet,  in  another  sense,  it  was  more  notable,  since  what 
had  been  tentatively  attempted  before  now  advanced  into  con- 
fident maturity,  and  since  the  popular  applications  of  musical 
art  now  became  more  conspicuous. 

The  mere  fact  that  the  art-form  known  as  the  opera  was 
extensively  undertaken  signified  a prodigious  change.  The 
opera  is  distinctively  secular,  and,  to  succeed,  it  must  appeal 
powerfully  to  the  popular  craving  for  amusement.  Hence, 
when  it  replaced  church  music  as  the  principal  object  of  pro- 


SUMMARY  OF  THE  CENTURY 


245 


fessional  ambition,  it  altered  the  whole  social  bearing  of  the 
art,  besides  affecting  its  inner  character.  Music  now  competed 
for  social  regard  in  a new  way,  unsupported  by  the  sentiments 
or  institutions  of  religion,  in  a form  essentially  public  and  dem- 
ocratic. While  it  is  true  that  the  opera  has  always  had  grave 
possibilities  of  misuse  in  that  it  tempts  to  superficial  methods 
and  tends  to  degenerate  into  a vulgar  diversion,  yet  from  the 
first  it  has  also  afforded  room  and  incentive  to  great  artists  to 
give  voice  to  certain  profound  and  intense  emotions  for  which 
church  music  makes  no  demand.  It  has  therefore  never  failed 
to  be  counted  one  of  the  consummate  tonal  art-forms. 

The  hectic  cultivation  of  the  opera  brought  into  prominence 
one  or  two  sides  of  music  that  were  but  imperfectly  developed 
before.  For  example,  the  art  of  solo-singing  received  an  al- 
together new  impetus.  It  is  true  that  fine  vocalization  was  re- 
quired in  the  Palestrina  type  of  choral  writing,  but  such  music 
demanded  nothing  like  the  versatility  and  magnetic  self-expres- 
sion essential  to  stage-declamation  and  the  delivery  of  elaborate 
arias.  The  17th-century  opera  was  necessarily  sensational  in 
method  and  aim,  for  vocalists  quite  as  much  as  for  librettists 
and  stage-managers.  Hence  came  an  art  of  singing  not  heard 
before,  or  perhaps  since.  Every  Intent  power  of  dexterity  and 
compass,  of  sonority  and  delicacy,  of  color  and  chiaroscuro,  was 
not  only  diligently  cultivated,  but  enthusiastically  applauded,  until 
the  display  of  virtuosity  became  the  be-all  and  end-all  of  the 
musical  drama.  Though  this  excessive  glorification  of  vocal 
technique  at  length  made  necessary  a revolution  in  operatic 
methods,  it  yet  served  a purpose  in  revealing  once  for  all  the 
possibilities  of  the  voice  as  an  artistic  instrument. 

The  opera  also  brought  out  the  values  of  certain  instrumental 
voices.  Especially  notable  was  the  rapid  advance  of  the  violin 
family.  The  utterance  of  passionate  feeling  and  the  depiction 
of  thrilling  situations  were  impossible  without  appliances  very 
different  from  the  feeble  and  colorless  instruments  of  the  16th 
century.  Hence  suddenly  this  new  group  of  instruments  came 
into  view,  with  presently  a new  order  of  performers,  and  then  a 
new  style  of  writing  suited  to  the  new  resources.  In  all  this 
lay  the  promise  of  the  modern  orchestra,  of  modern  chamber 
music,  and  of  the  modern  use  of  the  violin  as  the  solo  instru- 
ment par  excellence , 


246 


THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY 


In  connection  with  these  movements  the  theory  of  composi- 
tion made  steady  advance,  especially  in  the  freedom  and  solidity 
of  harmony  proper  as  distinguished  from  counterpoint,  in  the 
production  and  varied  embellishment  of  pure  melody,  and  in 
the  establishment  of  ‘ form  ’ in  general  and  of  certain  forms  in 
particular.  Dance-types  pushed  more  and  more  into  evidence 
in  serious  writing,  with  their  clearness  of  plan,  individuality  of 
figures  and  energetic  momentum.  Out  of  them,  it  was  clear, 
were  to  come  still  further  enrichments  of  style.  Already  the 
‘ sonata  ’ and  the  overture  were  settling  down  into  complex 
series  of  movements  in  which  larger  conceptions  could  find 
expression  than  are  possible  in  an  extended  work  without 
such  separated  and  contrasted  divisions. 

Meanwhile,  the  pursuit  of  choral  styles  and  of  organ  music 
was  not  given  up,  but,  especially  in  the  latter,  was  keeping 
alive  that  feeling  for  counterpoint  and  thematic  development 
generally  which  in  the  18th  century  was  to  attain  a fresh  cul- 
mination under  Bach  and  Handel.  In  this  field  German  musi- 
cians proved  themselves  more  apt  than  all  others,  thus  laying 
deep  the  foundations  on  which  their  country’s  later  eminence 
was  to  rest.  In  these  more  serious  and  thoughtful  sides  of  the 
art,  the  leadership  had  already  passed  from  Italy  to  northern 
Europe. 


PART  V 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


PART  V 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 

Chap.  XV.  Church  Music  in  Bach’s  Time, 
i i 5.  General  Survey. 

1 1 6.  German  Church  Music  at  its  Culmination. 

1 1 7.  Johann  Sebastian  Bach. 

1 18.  His  Style  and  Works. 

1 19.  The  Church  Cantata  and  Oratorio. 

120.  Other  German  Church  Music. 

121.  The  Imperial  Chapel. 

122.  In  Italy. 

123.  In  England. 

Chap.  XVI.  The  Culmination  of  the  Early  Italian  Opera. 

124.  The  Completed  Art-Form. 

125.  The  Rise  of  the  Neapolitan  School. 

126.  The  Opera  Buffa. 

127.  The  Opera  in  France. 

128.  The  Opera  in  Germany. 

129.  Georg  Friedrich  Handel. 

130.  His  Style  and  Significance. 

13 1.  The  English  Ballad-Opera. 

Chap.  XVII.  Instruments  and  Instrumentalists. 

132.  Solo  Instruments. 

133.  The  Rise  of  the  Virtuoso. 

134.  Instrumental  Ensembles. 

135.  Keyboard  Stringed  Instruments. 

136.  Tuning  and  Temperament. 

Chap.  XVIII.  Forms  of  Composition.  Theory  and  Literature. 

137.  The  Larger  Forms  in  General. 

138.  The  Suite. 

139.  The  Fugue. 

140.  The  Overture,  Sonata  and  Concerto. 

141.  Literature  about  Music. 

142.  Summary  of  the  Half-Century. 


248 


CHAPTER  XV 


CHURCH  MUSIC  IN  BACH’S  TIME 

115.  General  Survey.  — The  number  of  musicians  of  note  in 
the  1 8th  century  is  at  least  three  times  as  great  as  in  the  17th, 
but  of  these  the  majority  belong  to  the  time  after  1750.  For 
this  reason  and  because  then  distinctly  new  points  in  musical 
procedure  become  prominent,  the  century  may  well  be  divided 
into  two  parts,  the  first  related  closely  to  the  17th  century,  the 
second  looking  forward  toward  the  19th.  The  first  is  popularly 
known  as  the  age  of  Bach  and  Handel,  the  second  as  that  of 
Haydn  and  Mozart,  though  in  both  a host  of  other  masters  de- 
mand attention  and  in  neither  was  the  historical  movement 
dictated  by  individuals,  however  great. 

The  political  conditions  from  about  1690  were  extremely  complicated. 
Only  the  barest  hints  of  these  are  needed,  since  music  was  but  indirectly 
affected  by  them.  The  longest  reigns  were  those  of  Louis  XV.  of  France 
( 1 71 5—74),  Peter  the  Great  of  Russia  (1696-1725),  George  II.  of  Eng- 
land (1727-60),  Maria  Theresa  of  Austria  (1740-80),  and  Frederick  the 
Great  of  Prussia  (1740-86).  The  mediaeval  vision  of  a Holy  Roman  Em- 
pire was  vanishing.  Salient  events  were  the  dynastic  changes  in  England 
in  1688  and  1714,  the  latter  involving  entanglements  with  Germany ; 
the  War  of  the  Spanish  Succession,  ending  with  the  Peace  of  Utrecht 
(1713)  and  the  success  of  the  Bourbons;  the  brilliant,  but  short-lived, 
influence  of  Sweden  under  Charles  XII.  (1697-1718)  ; the  rise  of  Russia 
under  Peter  the  Great  (St.  Petersburg  founded  in  1703)  ; the  strong 
advance  of  Prussia  that  began  with  Frederick  I.  (d.  1713)  and  that  forth- 
with tended  to  displace  the  waning  eminence  of  the  Empire ; the  com- 
plicated War  of  the  Austrian  Succession  (1741-8);  and  the  Seven 
Years’  War  (1756-63),  incidental  to  which  were  repeated  collisions  be- 
tween France  and  England  on  both  sides  of  the  Atlantic. 

Probably  the  widespread  political  unrest  and  the  economic  disorders  of 
the  time  somewhat  checked  musical  enterprise.  All  the  fine  arts,  too, 
suffered  temporarily  from  the  diffused  spirit  of  intellectual  doubt  and 
criticism  that  now  set  in.  The  age  was  one  of  readjustments  of  thought, 
and,  while  important  gains  were  made  in  preparing  for  the  science  and 
literature  of  the  future,  the  immediate  impulse  to  creation  in  art  was  for 
the  time  lessened. 

249 


250 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


The  conspicuous  happenings  in  music  before  1750  were  these. 
In  Germany  the  advance  of  church  music,  both  for  voice  and  for 
organ,  came  to  a mighty  culmination  in  Bach,  the  first  of  the 
triumvirate  of  superlative  geniuses  now  universally  recognized. 
The  older  type  of  the  Italian  opera  was  perfected  by  Alessan- 
dro Scarlatti  and  Handel,  the  one  working  in  Italy  itself,  the 
other  mostly  in  England.  Connected  with  this  was  the  estab- 
lishment by  Handel  of  the  English  oratorio  as  a concert-form. 
The  means  of  instrumental  music  were  greatly  improved.  As 
has  already  been  seen,  during  the  first  third  of  the  century  the 
violin  was  perfected.  The  invention  of  the  pianoforte  belongs 
to  the  same  period,  though  its  special  influence  came  much  later. 
In  the  field  of  clavier  music  Domenico  Scarlatti  stands  out  as  a 
pioneer.  Chamber  music  continued  to  grow,  with  a fuller  recog- 
nition of  the  individuality  of  particular  instruments.  Musical 
theory  and  science  exhibited  fresh  activity  in  accordance  with 
the  analytic  spirit  of  the  age.  The  possibilities  of  harmonic 
expression  were  much  increased  by  the  growing  acceptance  of 
the  doctrine  of  tuning  in  equal  temperament.  The  half-century 
before  1750,  then,  shows  itself  as  a new  meeting-point  between 
the  old  and  the  new,  rising  in  a few  of  its  achievements  into 
comparison  with  the  16th  century. 

116.  German  Church  Music  at  its  Culmination. — While  in 

Italy  sacred  music  revolved  about  the  Catholic  liturgy  and  drew 
its  materials  from  Gregorian  sources,  in  Germany  it  was  based 
upon  the  chorale,  which  was  the  product  of  a different  race 
and  faith.  The  chorale,  unlike  Plain-Song,  was  vitally  con- 
nected with  popular  life  and  feeling,  and  its  fund  of  material  was 
constantly  growing.  Hence  Protestant  composition  instinctively 
advanced  on  lines  quite  unknown  in  Italy.  In  the  face  of  the 
rage  for  the  opera  it  preserved  its  integrity,  proceeding  with 
two  great  styles  which  Italy  presently  forgot,  namely,  chorus 
music  and  organ  music,  both  contrapuntal  in  structure.  As  has 
been  noted,  a multitude  of  writers  in  the  17th  century  labored 
earnestly  and  fruitfully  upon  the  chorale-elaboration,  the  fugue, 
the  motet  and  the  immature  liturgical  oratorio.  Church  music 
in  Germany  was  an  intensely  living  art. 

The  great  Bach  led  all  this  progress  to  a consummation 
so  complete  that  no  later  period  has  been  able  to  add  much 


GERMAN  CHURCH  MUSIC  AT  ITS  CULMINATION  25 1 


within  the  lines  then  established.  Bach’s  work  stood  squarely 
upon  that  of  several  preceding  generations.  The  technical 
foundations  were  already  provided.  It  remained  for  him  to  fill 
the  style  with  further  vitality  and  to  apply  it  to  the  utterance  of 
grand  ideas. 

The  Lutheran  liturgy,  like  the  Roman  and  Anglican,  was  favorable  to 
musical  art.  The  annual  calendar  was  the  old  Church  Year,  though  with 
few  saints1  days.  The  outline  of  services  closely  followed  the  Catholic, 
except  in  the  use  of  the  German  language,  the  frequent  congregational 
chorales  and  the  prominence  of  the  sermon.  For  every  Sunday  and 
other  special  day  were  prescribed,  not  only  the  Bible  lessons,  the  versicles 
and  the  prayers,  but  most  of  the  chorales  and  some  other  musical  exer- 
cises. The  observance  of  high  festivals  was  fuller  in  regular  services, 
often  spreading  over  more  than  one  day.  Even  on  ordinary  Sundays  the 
morning  service  was  nearly  four  hours  long,  beginning  at  seven  o'clock, 
including  an  hour’s  sermon  and  the  Eucharist.  Its  order  was  like  that  of 
High  Mass,  and  some  parts  of  it  were  in  the  old  Latin  forms.  The  mu- 
sical features  were  an  extended  organ-prelude,  a motet  (usually  in  Latin), 
the  Kyrie,  the  Litany,  the  Creed,  the  ‘principal  music1  (either  a motet  or 
a cantata),  many  chorales,  often  embellished  with  prelude  and  interludes, 
and  often  another  motet  in  the  Communion  Service.  Pains  were  taken  to 
vary  the  method  of  the  musical  exercises,  some  being  either  a cappella  or 
very  simply  accompanied,  others  lavishly  supported  by  the  organ  or  other 
instruments.  The  afternoon  service  was  also  elaborate,  but  without  the 
Eucharist.  While  such  services  were  not  universal,  in  the  chief  town- 
churches  they  were  a conspicuous  item  in  municipal  oversight  and  expen- 
diture, and  emphatically  popular.  The  use  of  the  vernacular  and  of 
chorales  kept  them  in  the  understanding  and  affection  of  the  people  gener- 
ally. Into  this  system,  with  its  free  use  of  music,  all  the  Bachs  threw 
themselves  with  enthusiasm,  none  more  so  than  the  greatest  of  the  family. 

117.  Johann  Sebastian  Bach. — The  accumulated  artistic  ca- 
pacity of  the  Bach  family  found  manifestation  in  the  genius  of 
Johann  Sebastian.  He  grew  up  and  did  all  his  mature  work  in 
Thuringia  and  Saxony,  in  towns  and  cities  full  of  traditions  of 
the  Bachs  and  where  several  noted  relatives  were  still  at  work. 
He  thus  entered  by  inheritance  into  the  heart  of  the  richest 
musical  life  of  Germany  as  it  stood  at  the  opening  of  the  18th 
century.  By  indefatigable  study  he  made  himself  master  of 
the  literature  of  German  music,  especially  that  for  the  organ 
and  the  choir,  welcoming  impressions  from  every  school.  His 
catholicity  enabled  him  to  absorb  much  from  the  styles  of  other 
countries,  especially  Italy  and  France.  He  was  keenly  con- 
scious of  the  best  tendencies  of  the  time,  notably  in  the  general 


252 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


theory  of  composition  and  in  instrumental  music  as  a specialty. 
It  was  no  narrowness  that  led  him  to  disregard  the  opera,  for 
from  the  first  he  was  probably  conscious  of  his  power  to  sur- 
pass what  was  for  the  time  exalted  and  to  reach  levels  of  con- 
structive intricacy  and  of  gigantic  expression  for  which  his  age 
was  not  ready.  Accordingly,  he  chose  more  and  more  to  labor 
for  the  satisfaction  of  his  own  intuitive  aspirations,  regardless 
of  immediate  success.  In  certain  quarters  and  on  some  sides 
his  greatness  was  understood  and  reverenced  during  his  life, 
but  not  until  almost  a century  after  was  there  any  adequate 
recognition  of  all  that  he  was  and  that  he  did  for  musical  art. 
Now  he  is  clearly  seen  to  have  been  not  only  the  consummation 
of  the  best  progress  of  previous  times,  but  also  the  source  of 
the  strongest  tendencies  of  all  modern  music  outside  of  the  dra- 
matic field.  He  trained  many  excellent  pupils,  but  his  greater 
legacy  to  musical  progress  is  the  far  larger  number  of  geniuses 
that  have  rejoiced  to  own  him  as  master  simply  from  the  study 
of  his  works. 

Johann  Sebastian  Bach  (d.  1750)  was  born  in  1685  at  Eisenach,  the  eighth 
child  of  Ambrosius  Bach,  a respected  violist  there  since  1671.  Losing  both 
parents  before  1695,  he  was  given  a home  by  his  brother  Christoph,  organist 
at  Ohrdruf.  From  his  father  he  received  instruction  on  the  violin  and  from 
his  brother  on  the  harpsichord  and  organ,  with  schooling  at  the  academy  at 
Ohrdruf,  where  his  soprano  voice  was  valued.  In  1700  a place  was  secured  for 
him  in  the  choir  and  school  of  St.  Michael’s  at  Liineburg  (near  Hamburg), 
where  his  gifts  as  a player  saved  him  when  presently  his  voice  broke.  Here 
he  had  practice  in  the  best  church  music,  access  to  the  fine  school  library,  and 
fruitful  contact  with  Georg  Bohm  (d.  1 733),  the  organist.  He  often  visited 
Hamburg  to  hear  Reinken  (d.  1722),  but  cared  little  for  the  opera.  He  also 
learned  much  of  French  chamber  music  from  hearing  the  ducal  orchestra  at 
Celle.  At  the  school  he  gained  a fair  classical  education.  In  music,  having 
no  special  master,  he  began  the  indefatigable  independent  study  that  contin- 
ued through  his  life.  From  the  first  he  was  grounded  in  the  contrapuntal 
style  as  used  by  various  schools  of  German  organists,  and  his  taste  set  toward 
church  and  chamber  music. 

In  1703  his  skill  as  a violinist  gave  him  a place  at  Weimar  in  one  or  both 
of  the  court-bands,  but  he  was  soon  made  town-organist  at  Arnstadt,  with  a 
large  new  organ  and  opportunity  for  study  and  writing.  Here  he  began  com- 
position in  earnest.  Late  in  1705  he  had  leave  to  visit  Liibeck  (traveling  the 
225  m.  thither  on  foot)  to  hear  the  organ  and  choir  music  of  Buxtehude,  the 
veteran  Danish  organist,  whose  style  powerfully  influenced  him.  He  long 
outstayed  his  leave,  and  this,  with  some  differences  about  details  in  his  work, 
led  him  to  remove  in  1707  to  Miihlhausen,  succeeding  J.  G.  Ahle.  In  1707, 


JOHANN  SEBASTIAN  BACH 


253 


also,  he  married  his  cousin  Maria,  daughter  of  Michael  Bach  of  Gehren.  He 
began  to  reorganize  the  church  music  and  to  have  the  organ  greatly  improved, 
but  in  1708  was  called  to  be  court-organist  and  violinist  to  the  Duke  of 
Weimar.  His  celebrity  had  already  begun  to  attract  pupils. 

His  new  patron  at  Weimar  was  a model  ruler,  a strict  Lutheran  and  a 
great  lover  of  church  music.  The  court  organ  was  small,  but  excellent,  and  the 
Kapelle  competent ; in  the  town-church 
the  organist  was  the  contrapuntist  J.  G. 

Walther,  for  a time  Bach’s  intimate 
friend.  This  period  was  one  of  the 
happiest  and  best  of  his  life.  Here  he 
attained  absolute  command  of  organ 
technique,  perfected  his  knowledge  as 
an  organ-expert,  and  wrote  most  of  his 
finest  organ-works.  He  studied  Italian 
chamber  music,  both  solo  and  con- 
certed, and  entered  deeply  into  its  de- 
veloping sense  of  extended  form.  He 
derived  much  from  the  works  of  certain 
Italian  masters,  like  Frescobaldi  and  Al- 
binoni. He  began  writing  fugues  and 
clavier-suites,  using  both  Italian  and 
French  styles,  but  with  great  inde- 
pendence. He  also  began  producing 
church  cantatas,  combining  some 

features  of  operatic  style  with  his  immense  resources  in  thematic  writing. 
Occasionally  he  made  trips  to  a distance,  especially  to  examine  or  exhibit 
important  organs,  as  to  Cassel,  Leipsic  and  Halle,  where  in  1714  he  was 
sought  as  town-organist,  and  to  Meiningen  and  Dresden,  where  in  1717  he 
challenged  the  boastful  French  clavier-player  Marchand  to  a trial  of  skill 
which  the  latter  lost  by  default.  In  1717,  however,  probably  because  not  fully 
appreciated  at  Weimar,  he  accepted  the  place  of  court-choirmaster  at  Cothen. 

The  Prince  of  Anhalt-Cothen  was  highly  cultivated  and  an  enthusiastic 
musician ; he  favored  the  Reformed  Church,  for  which  church  music  was  un- 
important, but  chamber  music  of  various  sorts  was  in  constant  demand.  Bach 
now  had  no  organ,  but  every  incentive  in  other  directions.  Here  he  matured 
his  views  as  to  clavier  technique  and  as  to  temperament,  and  composed  most 
of  his  greater  works  for  the  clavichord  and  harpsichord,  including  part  of  the 
Well-Tempered  Clavichord  (1722).  His  mastery  of  stringed  instruments 
became  prominent,  guiding  him  in  works  for  violin,  gamba  and  ’cello  that  only 
a practical  player  could  have  produced  (besides  leading  him  to  invent  the 
1 viola  pomposa,’  a form  between  the  viola  and  the  ’cello,  but  held  like  the 
former).  He  wrote  somewhat  for  other  instruments,  like  the  flute.  Here  he 
proceeded  to  deal  strikingly  with  ensemble  music,  including  suites,  concertos 
and  similar  extended  forms,  adopting  traditional  outlines  in  part,  but  trans- 
forming them  by  prodigious  contrapuntal  enrichment.  He  made  trips  away 
at  intervals,  as  to  Leipsic  in  1717,  to  Halle  in  1719,  where  he  just  missed 
seeing  Handel,  to  Carlsbad  several  times  with  the  Prince,  and  to  Hamburg 


254 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


in  1720,  where  he  won  the  admiration  of  the  aged  Reinken.  In  1720,  while 
he  was  at  Carlsbad,  his  wife  died  so  abruptly  that  he  did  not  know  the  fact 
till  his  return  three  weeks  after.  In  1721  he  married  Anna  Wiilken  of 
Weissenfels,  fifteen  years  his  junior,  a beautiful  singer,  and  so  deeply  interested 
in  music  that  she  engaged  in  detailed  study,  served  much  as  his  copyist  and 
shared  fully  in  his  ideals.  In  1723,  partly  to  enlarge  his  artistic  field,  partly  to 
get  better  schooling  for  his  children,  he  secured  appointment  as  cantor  at 
the  Thomasschule  in  Leipsic,  where  he  remained  till  his  death.  He  continued, 
however,  to  be  honorary  choirmaster  at  Cothen  and  also  at  Weissenfels. 

Technically,  his  new  position  at  Leipsic  was  not  a promotion,  though  its 
traditions  were  honorable  (see  sec.  95).  Its  duties  were  laborious  and  com- 
plicated. The  school  was  administered  as  the  choir-school  for  the  four 
town-churches,  and  the  cantor  was  responsible  to  both  the  Town  Council 
and  the  Church  Consistory.  Besides  living  at  the  school  and  sharing  in  its 
discipline,  he  was  expected  to  teach  Latin  as  well  as  music.  While  Ernesti 
was  rector  (till  1729),  the  pupils  were  few  and  poor,  the  equipment  and 
discipline  neglected,  and  the  interest  of  the  Council  in  the  musical  work 
narrow.  Bach  asserted  his  authority  as  supervisor  of  music  in  the  two 
leading  churches,  besides  composing  much  for  them  and  attending  to  all 
occasional  music  (processions,  weddings,  funerals),  and  also  claimed  his 
legal  rights  as  musician  to  the  university  which  his  predecessor,  Kuhnau,  had 
allowed  to  lapse.  This  latter  contention  he  carried  up  to  the  Elector  of 
Saxony  himself,  and  was  sustained.  Yet  the  situation  was  trying,  for  the  drift 
of  popular  interest  was  toward  the  opera  and  even  the  school  pupils  were  con- 
tinually being  drafted  as  operatic  singers.  It  is  pathetic  to  realize  what  in- 
efficient resources  he  had  for  his  public  work  — organists  that  disliked  his 
ideas,  a body  of  immature  singers  and  players,  seldom  more  than  twenty  in 
number,  and  a popular  hostility  to  all  serious  styles.  In  1730-4,  however, 
under  the  new  rector,  Gesner,  a fine  scholar  and  disciplinarian,  matters  were 
better,  but  lapsed  again  under  his  successor.  In  spite  of  Bach’s  increasing 
renown,  circumstances  combined  to  make  the  later  part  of  his  life  unhappy  on 
its  public  side  and  to  drive  him  into  seclusion.  His  delights  lay  in  his  home- 
life,  in  his  many  pupils,  in  his  visitors  from  abroad,  and  in  incessant  composi- 
tion of  the  most  ambitious  sort.  The  Leipsic  period  is  marked  by  the  writing 
of  an  enormous  number  of  cantatas  and  several  oratorios,  usually  devised 
with  reference  to  the  Lutheran  liturgy  and  calendar.  He  also  diligently  re- 
vised many  of  his  earlier  works.  He  made  many  trips,  especially  to  Dresden, 
where  Hasse  was  in  high  honor,  to  Weimar  and  Cothen,  and  to  the  various 
gathering-places  of  the  Bachs  in  Thuringia.  In  1747  he  was  invited  to 
Potsdam  by  Frederick  the  Great,  in  whose  band  was  Bach’s  son  Emanuel,  and 
was  received  with  the  greatest  favor.  Late  in  1749  he  underwent  an  operation 
upon  his  eyes  which  resulted  in  total  blindness.  In  1750  he  died  of  apoplexy. 
His  grave  in  the  yard  of  the  Johanniskirche  was  later  obliterated  in  municipal 
improvements,  but  his  supposed  remains  were  discovered  in  1894  and  reinterred 
in  the  church  on  the  150th  anniversary  of  his  death.  His  wife  and  his  three 
unmarried  daughters  struggled  on  in  poverty,  part  of  the  time  as  dependents 
upon  the  town;  Anna  Bach  died  in  1760.  The  surviving  sons,  with  one  ex- 
ception, attained  renown  and  importance.  Of  seven  children  by  his  first 


JOHANN  SEBASTIAN  BACH 


255 


marriage,  three  remained  ; and  of  thirteen  by  the  second,  six  — in  all,  five  sons 
and  four  daughters. 

In  appearance  Bach  was  stalwart,  with  a full  face  dominated  by  keen  eyes, 
arching  brows  and  an  ample  forehead.  His  expression  was  grave,  but  bright- 
ened readily  into  kindliness  or  humor.  In  manner  he  was  courteous,  but 
decidedly  dignified.  He  was  reserved  in  conversation,  but  wrote  with  clear- 
ness and  pungency.  He  formed  intimate  and  loyal  friendships  with  those 
whom  he  could  respect.  He  was  considerate  as  a critic,  especially  for 
earnest  students,  but  had  small  patience  with  pretension.  While  perfectly 
aware  of  his  abilities  and  dogged  about  his  official  rights,  he  hated  parade 
and  boasting.  He  was  a prodigious  worker,  rising  to  supremacy  as  execu- 
tant and  composer  by  persistent  self-discipline,  sparing  no  effort  to  acquaint 
himself  with  all  styles  except  that  of  the  opera,  and  becoming  also  an  expert 
in  organ-building  and  a good  musical  engraver.  He  was  a devout  and  ortho- 
dox Lutheran,  and  many  facts  show  the  depth  of  his  religious  sentiments 
and  their  bearing  on  his  musical  and  social  life. 

118.  His  Style  and  Works. — The  centre  of  Bach’s  art  was 
organ  music.  Though  first  trained  as  a violinist  and  always 
eminent  in  dealing  with  stringed  instruments,  he  instinctively 
fastened  upon  the  concerted  style  of  the  organ  as  the  field  for 
his  fullest  expression.  Here,  in  the  union  of  several  keyboards, 
each  with  its  varied  stops,  and  in  the  continuity  and  majesty  of 
tone  characteristic  of  the  instrument,  he  found  room  for  solid 
harmony,  for  manifold  polyphony,  for  unlimited  development, 
and  for  immense  climaxes  suitable  to  the  noblest  conceptions. 
Up  to  his  time  music  had  been  groping  after  the  formal  means 
for  sustained  and  cumulative  effects.  Bach  realized  the  neces- 
sity for  strong  thematic  material,  for  contrapuntal  organization, 
and  for  marshaling  parts  and  sections  with  the  utmost  artistic 
strategy.  In  his  hands  the  chorale-elaboration,  the  toccata  and 
the  fugue  attained  an  unsurpassed  grandeur.  And  in  whatever 
other  direction  he  chose  to  work  the  influence  of  his  organist’s 
method  of  thinking  and  writing  is  obvious,  whether  with  the 
smaller  resources  of  the  clavier,  or  with  solo  instruments  in 
combination,  or  with  voices  as  such  instruments  or  in  chorus. 

In  the  details  of  structure  Bach  never  fails  to  be  a contrapunt- 
ist, but  analysis  shows  how  far  his  polyphony  transcends  that 
of  the  mere  pedant.  Its  subject-material  is  almost  all  original, 
has  character  and  meaning  in  itself,  suggests  more  or  less 
clearly  a harmonic  idea,  and  often  achieves  decided  melodic 
beauty.  As  the  subjects  are  unfolded,  interwoven  and  com- 
bined with  episodical  matter,  it  is  clear  that  the  whole  is  greater 


256 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


than  its  parts,  having  an  organic  unity  to  which  all  details  con- 
tribute. All  music  of  this  sort  is  intensely  intellectual  rather 
than  sensuous,  but  Bach’s  works  never  lack  an  obvious  overrul- 
ing sentiment  that  lifts  them  out  of  the  merely  learned  level 
into  that  of  living  art.  But  the  means  chosen  demand  mental 
maturity  and  experience  in  both  performer  and  listener.  Hence 
his  works  are  not  fully  appreciated  except  by  those  of  advanced 
culture. 

Yet  Bach’s  works  are  almost  incredibly  varied.  He  was  not 
only  a prince  of  polyphonists,  but  far  ahead  of  his  times  in  the 
grasp  of  melodic  invention,  of  every  device  of  form,  and  of  the 
application  of  rhythmic  and  metric  energy.  He  had  begun 
to  foresee  the  sonata-form,  with  all  its  symphonic  possibilities. 
The  marvelous  ductility  of  melodic  material  in  his  hands  pre- 
sages the  plastic  part-writing  of  the  later  19th  century.  With  the 
latent  artistic  capacity  of  dance-forms  he  was  perfectly  famil- 
iar. Technically,  he  was  thoroughly  radical  regarding  modula- 
tion and  technique.  He  threw  aside  the  conventional  notions 
as  to  ‘ proper  keys,’  and  demanded  the  new  systems  of  tuning 
and  of  key-relation  so  as  to  open  for  use  the  whole  range  of 
tonal  possibility.  Instead  of  writing  down  to  players  and  sing- 
ers or  making  technique  an  end  in  itself,  he  imperiously  called 
for  a new  method  of  keyboard  fingering  and  for  a vocalization 
that  is  extreme  in  its  difficulty,  simply  because  technique  for 
him  was  subordinated  to  conception  and  construction. 

The  grandest  quality  of  his  larger  works  cannot  be  described 
in  words.  It  lay  in  the  mental  view  of  the  tonal  material  and 
its  handling  with  reference  to  the  embodiment  of  ideas  and  sen- 
timents. Like  all  artists  of  the  highest  class,  he  had  an  intui- 
tive sense  of  the  relation  of  formal  structure  to  the  expression 
of  the  mind  and  soul  in  universal  terms.  His  music,  therefore, 
is  a true  rescript  not  only  of  his  own  personality,  but  of  ideal 
personality.  Its  significance  has  proved  too  great  to  be  ex- 
hausted by  later  generations.  Hence  it  is  natural  to  class  him 
with  creators  like  Michelangelo,  Shakespeare  and  Goethe. 

Very  few  of  his  works  were  published  during  his  life.  Most  of  them 
remained  in  MS.  for  more  than  a century  after  his  death,  while  many  are 
known  to  be  lost.  The  recent  authoritative  edition  (1851-96)  numbers 
over  fifty  large  volumes,  presenting  many  hundreds  of  distinct  composi- 
tions, from  brief  chorales  to  gigantic  choral  or  orchestral  works. 


JOHANN  SEBASTIAN  BACH 


257 


The  greater  organ-works  include  nearly  20  extended  preludes  and 
fugues,  a few  toccatas,  a passacaglia,  and  many  chorale-preludes  and  elabo- 
rations. 

The  chief  works  for  clavier  alone  are  the  Das  wohltemperirte  Clavier 
(48  preludes  and  figures,  Pt.  I.,  1722,  Pt.  II.,  1744),  12  suites,  many 
inventions,  partite,  etc.,  besides  Das  ?>msikalische  Opfer  (1747)  and 
Die  Kunst  der  Fuge  (1749),  the  latter  of  which  requires  other  instru- 
ments in  part.  To  these  are  to  be  added  about  a dozen  concertos  for 
one,  two,  three,  and  even  four  claviers  with  orchestra. 

The  chamber  and  orchestral  works  comprise  a multitude  of  sonatas  and 
concertos,  (a)  for  violin,  viola  pomposa  or  ’cello  alone,  ( b ) for  flute,  violin 
or  viola  da  gamba  with  clavier,  (c)  for  violin  with  orchestra,  (d)  for 
varied  combinations  of  solo  instruments,  and  (e)  several  overtures  for 
orchestra. 

The  vocal  works  include  (a)  many  secular  cantatas,  serenatas  and  com- 
plimentary pieces,  (b)  over  200  motets  and  cantatas  for  the  Sundays  and 
festivals  of  the  Lutheran  Church  Year  (being  about  two-thirds  of  five 
complete  annual  cycles  of  such  works),  (e)  5 Passions,  including  the  St. 
Matthew  (1729),  the  St.  John  (1724),  together  with  similar  church  orato- 
rios for  Christmas  (six  parts,  1734),  for  Easter  and  for  Ascension,  (d)  2 
Magnificats,  5 large  masses  (that  in  B minor,  1733-8,  being  the  chief)  and 
several  shorter  ones. 

In  two  directions  these  works  involved  technical  procedures  that  were 
comparatively  novel.  The  first  related  to  the  method  of  keyboard  finger- 
ing. Bach  threw  his  influence  in  favor  of  employing  equally  all  the 
fingers  instead  of  mostly  the  middle  three,  as  had  been  the  tendency, 
and  hence  of  adopting  the  curved  or  curled  position  for  the  hand  instead 
of  a flat  or  rigid  one.  In  this  he  anticipated  and  guided  the  practice  of 
the  later  18th  century,  when  the  question  of  pianoforte  technique  became 
urgent.  While  he  himself  seems  not  to  have  approved  of  the  pianoforte 
in  the  types  first  presented  to  his  attention,  by  thus  increasing  dexterity, 
as  well  as  by  his  methods  of  -composition  (largely  induced  by  his  liking 
for  the  delicate  clavichord),  he  contributed  to  the  advance  of  pianoforte 
music.  The  second  principle  was  that  of  equal  temperament  in  tuning,  so 
that  modulation  might  take  place  freely  in  all  directions  (see  sec.  136). 
So  strenuous  was  Bach  for  this  that  wherever  possible  he  insisted  upon 
himself  tuning  the  clavichords  or  harpsichords  that  he  was  to  play,  and 
many  of  his  works  were  almost  unplayable  otherwise.  The  Well- 
Tempered  Clavichord  was  a conspicuous  fruit  of  this  conviction.  Here, 
again,  he  was  ahead  of  his  age,  although  he  did  not  originate  the  principle 
itself. 

119.  The  Church  Cantata  and  Oratorio.  — Bach’s  relation  to  the 
use  of  extended  vocal  works  of  a more  or  less  dramatic  type  in 
Lutheran  church  worship  is  so  important  that  it  requires  treat- 
ment by  itself.  As  has  been  noted,  his  church  cantatas  probably 
amounted  to  about  300  in  all,  while  his  Passions  and  similar 
s 


258 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


church  oratorios  and  his  masses  (which  belong  to  an  allied  class) 
number  1 5 or  more.  Among  these  are  many  of  his  greatest 
works,  and  it  is  evident  that  into  them  was  put  much  of  his 
choicest  thought  and  feeling,  since  they  offered  an  outlet  at 
once  for  his  musical  skill  and  his  sincere  religious  nature. 

The  word  ‘ cantata  1 has  been  variously  used.  In  the  16th  century  it 
meant  simply  any  vocal  work  as  distinguished  from  one  for  instruments. 
In  Italy,  for  about  a century  from  about  1650,  it  meant  specifically  a solo 
scena,  secular  or  sacred,  in  which  recitatives  and  arias  alternated,  often 
with  elaborate  accompaniments  for  a solo  instrument.  This  was  clearly 
an  offshoot  from  the  prevalent  opera.  This  form  became  popular  in  the 
services  of  the  Catholic  Church,  and  all  the  leading  composers  from 
Carissimi  onward  used  it,  often  abundantly.  Its  artistic  importance, 
however,  was  not  great,  since  it  had  little  independent  development. 

In  Germany,  on  the  other  hand,  the  word  cantata  came  to  be  applied  in 
the  17th  century  to  a work  in  which  Bible  passages  delivered  by  a solo 
voice  in  recitative  or  arioso  were  interspersed  with  congregational  chorales 
or  with  choruses  in  similar  style.  The  first  impetus  here  came  from 
Schiitz  of  Dresden.  The  effort  was  usually  to  unite  some  thread  of  story 
or  some  logical  series  of  ideas  with  expressions  of  devotion  or  meditation. 
The  peculiarity  of  the  whole  lay  in  its  congregational  point  of  view,  and 
herein  it  differed  radically  from  the  operatic  Italian  cantata.  In  its  corre- 
spondence to  the  warm  Protestant  piety  of  the  German  people  it  was  often 
intensely  subjective  and  even  extravagantly  sentimental. 

The  new  interest  in  the  opera  about  1700  throughout  Germany  reacted 
promptly  upon  this  immature  form  of  cantata.  Hence  arose  a demand  for 
poetical  texts  specially  prepared  for  semi-dramatic  musical  treatment  and 
at  the  same  time  connected  with  the  special  character  of  the  Sundays  and 
other  days  of  the  Lutheran  calendar.  The  first  noted  poet  was  Erdmann 
Neumeister  (d.  1756),  a clergyman  of  Weissenfels  and  Sorau,  who  wrote 
five  complete  annual  cycles  (1704-16),  starting  from  the  freestyle  of  the 
Italian  poetical  madrigal,  but  exemplifying  many  variations  of  handling. 
Similar  texts  were  soon  attempted  by  others  outside  the  church  circle,  as 
from  1 7 1 1 by  Salomo  Franck  of  Jena  and  Weimar  (d.  1725),  and  from 
1724  by  Christian  Friedrich  Henrici  (nom-de-plume,  Picander)  of  Leipsic 
(d.  1764).  The  musical  setting  of  such  texts  at  once  became  common 
with  musicians  and  decidedly  popular. 

Bach’s  handling  of  the  cantata  varied  much  in  different  cases, 
and  the  elements  emphasized  came  from  many  sources.  Thus 
the  recitatives  and  arias  are  of  operatic  origin,  the  chorales  from 
the  Protestant  service,  the  form  of  the  preludes  and  often  of 
other  numbers  from  chamber  music,  and  the  polyphonic  choruses 
and  accompaniments  built  on  the  lines  of  organ  composition. 
But  his  genius  succeeded  in  fusing  these  diverse  elements  into 


CHURCH  CANTATAS  AND  PASSIONS 


259 


unity  and  applying  them  to  the  exposition  of  sustained  religious 
conceptions.  Almost  always  the  chorale  is  conspicuous,  often 
serving  as  the  musical  text  for  the  whole,  usually  presented 
strongly  in  the  opening  and  closing  numbers  at  least,  and  in  its 
detailed  treatment  often  carried  to  the  extreme  of  contrapuntal 
elaboration.  The  form  of  the  solo  numbers  varies  greatly, 
showing  that  he  was  not  only  fully  aware  of  the  current  style  of 
da  capo  aria,  but  ready  to  adopt  other  plans  as  well ; usually 
there  is  a detailed  development  of  the  sentiment  of  the  words, 
though  often  with  a profundity  of  interpretation  that  escapes 
the  casual  hearer.  The  accompaniments,  usually  for  at  least 
some  solo  instruments  besides  the  organ,  are  full  of  learning 
and  originality,  and  constitute  important  parts  of  the  total  effect. 
Sometimes  there  is  a prelude  or  overture.  The  enormous  extent 
of  Bach’s  work  in  this  field  indicates  how  much  it  engaged  his 
interest.  Yet,  unfortunately,  the  intimate  connection  of  all  these 
works  with  the  specific  type  of  Lutheran  service  of  the  period 
makes  it  impossible  to  maintain  them  in  general  popular  knowl- 
edge and  appreciation. 

In  selecting  his  texts  Bach  often  used  those  of  inferior  literary  quality, 
evidently  feeling  that  the  dignity  of  the  total  impression  would  be  deter- 
mined by  the  music.  Yet  in  editing  these  texts  and  in  laying  them  out 
for  treatment  he  was  guided  by  a fine  dramatic  instinct. 

The  Passions  and  other  festival  oratorios  of  Bach  are  really 
expanded  cantatas.  They  involve  the  same  structural  elements, 
but  rest  on  texts  that  are  still  more  evidently  dramatic  or  his- 
torical in  substance.  Here  again  we  find  him  taking  forms 
and  materials  that  had  been  used  before,  either  in  similar  or 
different  connections,  and  remodeling  them  into  a novel  and 
powerful  unity  all  his  own.  He  thus  contributed  notably  to 
one  branch  of  the  development  of  the  oratorio  as  a significant 
art-form. 

As  soon  as  extended  musical  treatment  of  the  mediaeval  Mysteries  be- 
came common,  the  preparation  of  settings  of  Gospel  stories  of  the  suf- 
ferings and  death  of  Christ,  or  of  other  texts  based  upon  these  stories, 
naturally  aroused  peculiar  interest.  The  methods  adopted  at  different 
periods  in  the  history  of  the  musical  Passion  vary  widely.  The  text 
selected  might  be  wholly  Biblical,  or  might  contain  verses  of  hymns  suit- 
able for  chorales  or  part-song  settings,  or  might  consist  entirely  of  a freely 
composed  narration  and  elaboration  of  the  Gospel  incidents.  The  musi- 
cal form  might  be  Plain-Song  melodies  throughout,  or  such  melodies  alter- 


26o 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


nating  with  chorales  or  polyphonic  numbers.  Throughout  the  16th 
century  expert  composers  undertook  settings  in  full  motet  or  part-song 
form,  often  with  madrigal  numbers.  Experiments  followed  in  more 
or  less  dramatic  form,  with  some  distinction  of  personages,  after 
1600  with  recitatives  and  ariosos,  and  after  about  1675  with  true  arias. 
Special  texts  for  dramatic  Passions  began  to  be  written  with  care  soon 
after  1 700,  the  most  popular  of  them  being  that  by  Barthold  Heinrich 
Brockes  (d.  1747)  of  Hamburg  (1712).  The  regular  use  of  such  texts 
with  varying  musical  settings  continued  to  be  a feature  of  Good  Friday 
services  until  late  in  the  1 8th  century,  and  irregularly  till  much  later. 

Among  the  older  polyphonic  or  motet  Passions  were  those  by  Davy 
(before  1500),  Obrecht  (before  1505),  Galliculns  (1528),  De  Rore  (1557), 
a Burck  (1568-74),  Daser  (1578),  Handl  (1587),  Gesius  (1588),  Ma- 
chold  (1593),  Deniantius  (1623),  Gluck  (1660),  and  some  others. 

Of  dramatic  works,  including  more  and  more  solo  material  and  about 
1700  tending  to  pass  over  fully  into  the  style  of  the  Italian  oratorio, 
there  were  many,  as  by  Walther  (1530-52),  Scandello  (1550-70),  Meiland 
(1 568-70),  Lassus  (1 573-82),  A sola  (c.  1580),  Reiner  (?),  Victoria  (1585), 
Vulpius  (1613),  Mancinus  (1620),  Harnisch  (1621),  Schiitz  (1623-66), 
Chr.  Schultz  (1653),  Sebastiani  (1672),  Theile  (1673),  Funcke  (1683, 
with  the  first  true  arias),  Rothe  (1697),  Reiser  (1704-12),  Ha?idel 
(1704-16),  Telemann  (1716-66),  Mattheso?i  (171 7),  Kuhnau  (1721), 
and  others. 

In  the  German  Passions  there  came  to  be  a tendency  to  adhere  to  fixed 
plans  of  text  and  treatment  that  amounted  almost  to  a liturgical  formula. 
The  use  of  chorales  varied  greatly,  and  towards  1700  their  congregational 
rendering  was  largely  replaced  by  solos. 

Bach’s  treatment  of  the  Passion-form  was  in  a sense  eclectic, 
in  that  he  combined  elements  from  various  styles,  including  cho- 
rales of  different  degrees  of  elaboration,  polyphonic  choruses, 
often  of  gigantic  proportions,  recitatives,  both  plain  and  accom- 
panied, arias  in  extended  form,  and  dramatic  choruses,  with  the 
fullest  use  of  instrumental  resources  for  accompaniments  and 
even  for  independent  movements.  He  approached  the  matter 
from  the  liturgical  or  devotional  side,  rather  than  the  purely 
dramatic,  but  he  was  also  ready  to  employ  intensely  dramatic 
methods  at  certain  points.  With  his  five  Passions  proper  be- 
long his  festival  oratorios  for  Christmas,  Easter  and  Ascension, 
the  plan  of  which  was  analogous,  though  their  emotional  con- 
tent was  different.  In  these  works  the  liturgical  oratorio 
reached  a culmination  that  has  not  since  been  surpassed. 

The  more  famous  of  this  group  are  the  St.  Matthew  Passion  (1729) 
and  the  Christmas  Oratorio  (1734),  both  of  which  remain  in  the  reper- 
tory of  competent  choral  societies. 


THE  MUSICAL  MASS 


261 

Bach’s  attitude  toward  the  musical  mass,  especially  as  shown 
in  that  in  B minor  (1733-8),  was  extremely  original.  Tradition- 
ally, the  form  had  been  so  closely  identified  with  the  actual 
Catholic  liturgy  that  its  treatment  had  been  either  fully  sub- 
ordinated to  its  ritual  surroundings,  or,  if  elaborate,  developed 
along  conventional  lines  of  method  and  sentiment.  Bach,  a 
Protestant  and  apparently  not  writing  for  ritual  use  in  a Catholic 
service,  followed  neither  of  these  types,  though  influenced  some- 
what by  the  second.  In  the  text  of  the  mass  (all  of  which  was 
in  some  use  in  Lutheran  services)  he  saw  possibilities  of  gigantic 
artistic  expression.  The  result  is  a monumental  sublimation  of 
ritual  music,  treated  not  as  an  accessory  of  a church  service, 
but  as  an  end  in  itself.  Hence  his  masses,  especially  the  great 
one,  belong  properly  to  the  church  oratorio  class,  with  the 
Passions,  etc.,  but  have  a range  of  abstract  topic  and  idea  not 
often  reached  by  the  historical  oratorio. 

It  has  been  supposed  that  Bach’s  attention  to  the  mass  was  partly  in 
connection  with  his  official  relations  to  the  Catholic  court  of  Dresden,  but 
it  is  not  clear  that  any  of  his  works  of  this  class  were  actually  used  as 
wholes  in  Catholic  services.  Parts  of  them  were  used  at  Leipsic,  however. 

With  the  B minor  Mass  is  to  be  classed  the  great  Magnificat  in  D 
(1723  ?),  since  it,  too,  is  a setting  of  a Catholic  ritual  text. 

120.  Other  German  Church  Music.  — The  general  interest 
among  German  Protestants  in  music  for  the  organ  and  the  choir 
in  the  later  17th  century  continued  into  the  18th,  but  artistically 
it  was  confused  by  the  rapid  advance  of  the  opera  on  the  one 
hand  and  of  diverting  chamber  music  on  the  other.  While  Bach, 
by  virtue  of  his  mastery  of  technique,  his  profundity  of  thought, 
and  his  independence  of  mere  popularity,  pushed  on  to  achieve- 
ments of  enduring  value,  his  contemporaries  generally  sought 
to  gratify  the  taste  of  the  time,  sometimes  with  inventive  ability, 
sometimes  in  slavish  complaisance.  The  revolt  from  the  older 
severity  became  steadily  stronger,  though  for  a long  period 
without  leading  to  the  invention  of  new  styles  of  positive  im- 
portance. In  vocal  music  the  prevalent  forms  were  of  the 
cantata  or  Passion  class,  usually  treated  after  the  sentimental 
fashion  of  the  opera.  Organ  music  persisted  longer  along  the 
serious  paths  of  the  fugue  and  the  chorale-elaboration,  but  with 
constantly  diminishing  vigor.  With  but  few  exceptions,  the 
drift  of  the  period  was  against  church  music  in  its  purity. 


262 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


The  century  opened  with  a large  number  of  great  organists  in  service,  like 
Joh.  Christoph  Bach  of  Eisenach  (d.  1703),  succeeded  there  by  Joh.  Bernhard 
Bach  (d.  1749),  Pachelbel  (d.  1706)  at  Nuremberg,  Buxtehude  (d.  1707)  at 
Lubeck,  Joh.  Egidius  Bach  (d.  1717)  and  Buttstett  (d.  1727)  at  Erfurt,  Reinken 
(d.  1722)  and  Lubeck  (d.  1740)  at  Hamburg,  and  Bohm  (d.  1733)  at  Lline- 
burg.  There  were  also  noted  vocal  contrapuntists,  like  Theile  (d.  1714)  at 
Merseburg,  and  the  two  Kriegers  (d.  1725,  ’35)  at  Weissenfels  and  Zittau 
respectively.  Kuhnau  (d.  1722),  organist  at  Leipsic  from  1684  and  cantor  of 
the  Thomasschule  from  1700  (preceding  Bach),  is  also  remembered  for  many 
cantatas  and  a fine  Passion  (1721)  in  a flowing  style. 

The  opening  of  the  century  is  further  marked  at  Hamburg  by  three  strong 
composers  of  nearly  the  same  age,  who  gave  at  least  part  of  their  talents  to 
church  music : — 

Reinhard  Keiser  (d.  1739)  to°k  up  church  music  first  from  1704,  when  at 
the  height  of  his  operatic  career,  and  again  from  1728,  when  cantor  at  Hamburg 
(see  sec.  87).  Several  of  his  Passions  are  known,  written  to  poems  by  Hunold 
( 1 704) , K onig  ( 1 7 1 1 ) and  Brockes  ( 1 7 1 2) , the  latter  text  being  also  set  by  Tele- 
mannand  Handel  in  1716,  by  Mattheson  in  I7i7and  byStolzel  (d.  1749).  His 
solo  cantatas  were  numerous  and  exhibited  the  facile  melodic  skill  shown  in  his 
operas.  Neither  his  experience  nor  his  character  fitted  him  to  enter  deeply 
into  sacred  music. 

Johann  Mattheson  (d.  1764)  began  his  musical  life  at  Hamburg  as  a choir- 
boy in  1690.  After  writing  several  operas  (from  1699),  he  was  cantor  at  the 
cathedral  in  1715-28  (preceding  Keiser),  retiring  because  of  increasing  deaf- 
ness. Though  best  known  for  his  critical  writings,  he  is  credited  with  some 
25  oratorios  and  cantatas,  at  least  2 Passions  and  a mass,  written  during  his 
cantorate.  His  style  was  less  melodious  and  effective  than  Reiser’s,  but  de- 
cidedly stronger  in  scholarship  and  churchly  sympathy.  His  oratorios  were  a 
serious  attempt  to  utilize  the  new  dramatic  methods  in  connection  with  sincere 
public  worship.  For  a short  time  he  was  a friend  of  Handel,  but  nearly  killed 
him  in  a hasty  duel  (1704)  ; later  he  was  a fairly  cordial  judge  of  the  latter’s 
greatness. 

Georg  Philipp  Telemann  (d.  1767)  was  superior  to  Mattheson  in  versatility  and 
enthusiasm,  though  almost  wholly  self-taught.  In  1701,  while  studying  at 
Leipsic  University,  he  began  to  write  cantatas  and  to  serve  as  organist.  At 
this  time  he  was  intimate  with  Handel.  After  short  terms  as  court-musician  at 
Sorau  from  1704  and  at  Eisenach  from  1708,  he  became  in  1712  choirmaster  at 
Frankfort  and  in  1721  town-musician  at  Hamburg,  where  he  continued  till  his 
death  over  40  years  later.  His  activity  as  a church  composer  began  at  Frank- 
fort and  continued  side  by  side  with  his  operatic  and  instrumental  work.  His 
fertility  and  rapidity  were  almost  incredible,  his  sacred  works  including  12 
annual  cycles  of  cantatas  (said  to  comprise  about  3000  numbers),  besides 
many  detached  ones,  44  Passions  (1716-66),  several  oratorios,  about  65  in- 
stallation-pieces, about  25  anthems  for  weddings  and  funerals,  and  numerous 
accompanied  solos  of  various  sorts.  His  style  naturally  tended  to  be  super- 
ficial, but  was  popularly  so  effective  that  he  was  one  of  the  most  famous  com- 
posers of  his  day. 

Regarding  Handel’s  works  of  this  class,  see  secs.  1 29-1 30. 


GERMAN  CHURCH  MUSICIANS  263 

In  central  Germany  the  drift  away  from  contrapuntal  methods  was  delayed 
by  the  influence  of  a few  masters  more  or  less  of  the  older  order:  — 

Johann  Gottfried  Walther  (d.  1748)  and  J.  S.  Bach  were  closely  related 
through  their  mothers,  were  intimate  friends  and  artistically  akin.  Walther 
was  brought  up  at  Erfurt,  where  he  was  organist  from  1702,  removing  thence 
in  1707  to  be  town-organist  and  later  court-musician  at  Weimar.  He  was 
famous  as  a player  and  traveled  much  to  perfect  his  knowledge  of  organ  styles. 
Most  of  his  extant  works  are  chorale-elaborations,  in  which  he  was  almost  as 
successful  as  Bach.  He  was  the  author  of  the  first  musical  dictionary  (see 
sec.  141). 

David  Heinichen  (d.  1729)  attended  the  Thomasschule  at  Leipsic,  studied 
law  there  and  practised  at  Weissenfels,  but  from  about  1709  devoted  himself  to 
music  at  Leipsic.  In  1713,  wealthy  patrons,  one  of  whom  was  the  Prince  of  Co- 
then  whom  Bach  later  served,  enabled  him  to  travel  and  work  in  Italy,  whence 
in  1718  he  returned  to  Dresden  as  court-choirmaster.  Besides  his  operatic  and 
instrumental  works  and  a manual  of  figured  bass  (171 1),  he  wrote  much  church 
music,  chiefly  masses  and  motets  for  the  Catholic  service,  with  2 oratorios.  At 
first  he  cultivated  the  older  styles,  but  ultimately  adopted  the  easier  Italian  meth- 
ods. Technically  he  preceded  Bach  in  advocating  free  fingering  and  the  entire 
circle  of  keys  in  modulation.  His  assistant  from  1719  and  his  successor  was  Jo- 
hann Dismas  Zelenka  (d.  1745),  a Bohemian  whose  tireless  industry  produced 
over  20  masses,  3 requiems,  100  psalms,  3 oratorios,  many  motets,  etc. 
(from  1712). 

Gottfried  Heinrich  Stolzel  (d.  1749),  after  good  training  at  Schneeberg,  entered 
Leipsic  University  in  1707  and  profited  by  the  musical  opportunities  of  the  city. 
From  1710  he  was  busily  engaged,  chiefly  upon  opera-writing,  at  Breslau,  in  Italy, 
at  Prague,  Bayreuth  and  Gera  successively,  and  in  1719  became  court-musician 
at  Gotha.  He  produced  a prodigious  amount  of  music,  chiefly  sacred,  including 
8 double  annual  cantata-cycles,  14  Passions,  many  masses,  festival  music,  etc., 
besides  secular  works.  He  was  an  accomplished  contrapuntist,  especially  notable 
for  the  vigor  of  his  accompaniments  and  often  for  the  difficulty  of  his  voice-writ- 
ing, and  his  work  commanded  the  respect  of  Bach. 

Johann  Friedrich  Fasch  (d.  1758),  fellow-student  with  Stolzel  at  Leipsic  from 
1707,  diligently  cultivated  the  popular  style  of  Kuhnau  and  Telemann,  was 
variously  employed  for  some  years  at  Naumburg,  Darmstadt,  Gera  and  Zeitz, 
and  from  1722  was  court-musician  at  Zerbst  (having  failed  to  win  the  cantorate 
at  Leipsic  which  Bach  secured).  His  church  compositions  include  many  Pas- 
sions, oratorios,  cantatas,  etc.,  besides  instrumental  works. 

Christoph  Forster  (d.  1745),  pupil  of  Heinichen,  from  1717  was  court-com- 
poser at  Merseburg.  He  is  said  to  have  written  over  300  works,  including  a 
cantata-cycle  and  many  other  cantatas  in  the  Italian  style,  but  his  works  are 
confused  with  those  of  the  earlier  Kaspar  Forster  (d.  1673). 

Two  other  prolific  and  learned  writers  of  the  period,  in  eastern  and  southern 
Germany  respectively,  were  Georg  Gebel  [Sr.]  (d.  1750),  organist  at  Breslau 
from  1713,  and  Meinrad  Spiess  (d.  1761),  of  the  monastery  of  Irrsee. 

It  is  to  be  noted  that  all  these  composers  were  close  contemporaries  of 
Bach  and  Handel,  and  serve  with  them  to  characterize  the  important 
transitional  period  in  German  church  music  from  1700  to  1750. 


264 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


In  the  next  group  of  composers  are  several  whose  fame  is 
greatest  in  other  fields  than  that  of  church  music,  though  some 
of  them  were  industrious  in  the  latter.  The  increase  in  the  num- 
ber of  Catholic  musicians  of  note  is  striking.  In  general,  mono- 
phonic methods  predominate  over  polyphonic,  with  more  or  less 
of  the  theatric  sensuousness  that  is  essentially  diverse  both  from 
the  classic  restraint  of  the  old  Palestrina  style  and  from  the  in- 
tellectual depth  of  the  later  German  counterpoint. 

Johann  Adolph  Hasse  (d.  1783),  the  popular  opera-writer  (see  sec.  125),  was 
the  most  brilliant  of  the  Catholic  writers  of  the  time  in  Germany,  represented 
by  numerous  masses,  Te  Deums,  Magnificats,  motets,  cantatas  and  about  12 
oratorios,  mostly  written  after  he  became  court-musician  at  Dresden  in  1731. 
His  style  was  attractive  melodically,  but  lacked  energy  and  sublimity. 

Other  Catholic  composers  in  various  parts  of  northern  Europe  were  Valen- 
tin Rathgeber  (d.  1750),  a monk  of  Banz  in  Franconia,  more  fertile  than  dis- 
tinguished; Henri  Jacques  de  Croes  (d.  1786),  trained  at  Antwerp  and  first 
active  there,  from  1729  choirmaster  at  Ratisbon,  but  from  1749  again  in 
Belgium  (at  Brussels),  of  whose  many  works  few  remain;  and  G.  A.  Ristori 
of  Dresden  (d.  1753),  who,  besides  his  operas,  wrote  many  masses,  motets, 
psalms,  etc.,  with  3 oratorios  (see  sec.  126). 

Christoph  Gottlieb  Schroter  (d.  1782),  on  the  other  hand,  continued  the 
Lutheran  traditions  as  organist  and  church  composer  at  Minden  from  1726 
and  at  Nordhausen  from  1732.  .Best  known  by  his  theoretical  and  critical 
writings  (see  sec.  165)  and  for  his  relation  to  the  development  of  the  piano- 
forte (see  sec.  135),  he  was  also  able  and  fertile  in  sacred  music,  his  works 
including  7 cantata-cycles,  5 Passions,  many  festival  and  other  cantatas,  to- 
gether with  fugues  and  chorale-preludes  for  the  organ.  His  learning  as  a 
harmonist  gave  his  style  a decided  richness. 

Johann  Schneider  (d.  1787),  a pupil  of  Bach  and  organist  from  1721  at 
Saalfeld,  from  1726  at  Weimar  and  from  1730  at  Leipsic,  was  one  of  the  best 
players  and  improvisers  of  the  day,  with  some  organ-compositions. 

Karl  Heinrich  Graun  (d.  1759),  beginning  as  a choirboy  at  Dresden,  won 
his  first  success  in  opera,  but  also  early  undertook  church  composition. 
After  ten  years  at  Brunswick,  he  became  in  1735  the  protegd  of  Frederick 
of  Prussia,  and  from  1740  was  royal  choirmaster  at  Berlin  — a post  more  con- 
spicuous than  stimulating,  since  the  king  demanded  mainly  French  and  Italian 
styles.  He  wrote  many  cantatas,  including  2 annual  cycles,  many  Latin 
motets,  5-6  Passions,  several  masses  and  a fine  Te  Deum  (1756),  with  some 
organ-pieces  (see  sec.  128).  His  Passion  cantata  Der  Tod  Jesu  (1755) 
remains  in  annual  use  at  Berlin,  and  enjoys  therefore  a peculiar  renown.  His 
style  was  fluent,  but  without  decided  originality  or  force. 

Johann  Peter  Kellner  (d.  1788?)  was  from  1728  organist  and  cantor  at 
Grafenroda  in  Thuringia.  A devoted  admirer  of  both  Bach  and  Handel,  as 
both  player  and  composer  he  served  to  perpetuate  the  noble  organ  style,  his 
works  including  many  fugues,  preludes  and  suites,  besides  some  cantatas  and 
a Passion. 


GERMAN  CHURCH  MUSICIANS 


265 


Georg  Gebel  [Jr.]  (d.  1753),  the  precocious  son  and  pupil  of  the  Gebel 
named  above,  was  from  1729  organist  at  Breslau,  from  1735  court-choirmaster 
at  Dresden,  and  from  I747'at  Rudolstadt,  much  admired  for  his  facile  style. 
Besides  operas,  he  wrote  many  cantatas  and  2 Passions.  (His  works, 
however,  are  confused  with  his  father’s.) 

Johann  Heinrich  Rolle  (d.  1785)  began  church  composition  as  a boy  of  13 
(1731)  at  Magdeburg,  becoming  organist  there  the  next  year.  From  1736  he 
studied  law  at  Leipsic  and  began  practice  at  Berlin,  where  in  1740  he  resumed 
musical  work  at  the  court  of  Frederick  the  Great.  From  1746  he  was  again 
organist  at  Magdeburg  and  succeeded  his  father  as  town-musician  in  1752. 
His  works  were  exceedingly  many,  mostly  sacred,  including  several  cantata- 
cycles,  at  least  10  Passions  and  several  other  similar  works,  15  or  more 
oratorios  ( Der  Tod  Abels , 1771,  being  the  most  admired),  and  many  songs. 
His  invention  was  not  equal  to  his  dramatic  ideas. 

Among  the  many  pupils  of  the  great  Bach  who  in  the  latter  part  of  the 
century  attained  eminence  in  church  composition  were  his  eldest  son  Wilhelm 
Friedemann  Bach  (d.  1784),  organist  at  Dresden  from  1733  and  at  Halle  in 
1747-64,  who  was  a player  of  the  first  order  and  a powerful  writer  for  both 
organ  and  choir,  but  whose  later  life  was  spent  in  poverty  and  disgrace,  due 
to  dissipation;  his  third  son  Karl  Philipp  Emanuel  Bach  (d.  1788),  most 
eminent  as  the  founder  of  the  forms  of  instrumental  composition  that  charac- 
terized the  period  of  Haydn  and  Mozart  (see  sec.  140),  but  notable  also  for 
worthy  church  music,  including  many  cantatas,  over  20  Passions  and  similar 
works,  a few  oratorios,  etc.;  Johann  Ludwig  Krebs  (d.  1780),  under  Bach’s 
care  for  about  10  years  and  esteemed  by  him  his  best  organ  pupil,  from  1737 
at  Zwickau,  from  1744  at  Zeitz,  and  from  1756  at  Altenburg,  with  many  fine 
organ  works  and  some  cantatas,  besides  clavier-pieces,  mostly  in  the  homophonic 
style;  Johann  Philipp  Kirnberger  (d.  1783),  from  1741  a teacher  in  Poland 
and  from  1752  prominent  at  the  Berlin  court,  a prolific  but  dry  composer,  and 
a theorist  of  importance,  though  not  of  insight  (see  sec.  165)  ; Johann  Fried- 
rich Agricola  (d.  1774),  court-composer  at  Berlin  from  1751  and  Graun’s 
successor  as  royal  choirmaster  in  1759,  a fine  organist  and  popular  singing- 
teacher,  but  not  eminent  as  a composer,  though  he  wrote  considerable  sacred 
music,  besides  several  operas;  and  Gottfried  August  Homilius  (d.  1785), 
organist  at  Dresden  from  1742  and  cantor  at  the  Kreuzschule  from  1755,  a 
good  player  and  favorite  church  composer,  with  a cantata-cycle,  Passions, 
motets,  chorales  and  organ-pieces,  all  in  a style  remote  from  that  of  his 
master. 

Here  may  be  added,  though  not  in  the  above  series,  Matthias  van  den 
Gheyn  (d.  1785),  from  1741  organist  and  carillonneur  at  Louvain,  whose  fame 
as  a player  was  extensive. 

121.  The  Imperial  Chapel.  — While  under  Bach  and  his  con- 
temporaries Protestant  music  was  attaining  its  great  culmina- 
tion, the  current  of  composition  in  Catholic  countries  went  on, 
tending  steadily  into  new  channels  of  expression,  mostly  theatric, 
but  not  wholly  forsaking  the  old  ways  of  a cappella  polyphony. 


266 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


In  both  church  and  dramatic  music  at  the  opening  of  the 
century  Vienna  was  one  of  the  most  notable  centres,  in  touch 
with  Germany  on  the  one  hand  and  with  Italy  on  the  other. 
Under  three  successive  Emperors,  Leopold  I.  (d.  1705),  Joseph  I. 
(d.  1 7 1 1 ) and  Charles  VI.  (d.  1740),  the  Imperial  Chapel,  with 
the  Chapels  of  the  two  Empresses  Dowager,  and  of  the  cathe- 
dral church  of  St.  Stephen’s,  attracted  a host  of  great  directors, 
composers,  players  and  singers.  Talented  Italians  were  natu- 
rally in  constant  request,  but  masters  of  other  nationalities  did 
not  wholly  fail  of  honor.  In  spite  of  the  fact  that  in  the  middle 
of  the  century,  under  Maria  Theresa,  there  was  a decided  lapse 
of  imperial  interest,  this  earlier  time  presaged  in  several  ways 
the  remarkable  eminence  of  the  Viennese  school  in  the  later 
period  of  Haydn,  Mozart  and  Beethoven. 

In  the  Imperial  Chapel  itself  the  number  of  active  musicians,  vocalists 
and  instrumentalists  rose  to  fully  100  under  Joseph  I.  and  to  about  135 
under  Charles  VI.,  the  offices  of  choirmaster,  assistant  choirmaster,  com- 
poser, organist  and  chief  singers  commanding  good  salaries.  The  list  of 
choirmasters  includes  Antonio  Pancotti  (d.  1709),  singer  from  1665,  assist- 
ant from  1697,  chief  from  1700,  M.  A.  Ziani  (d.  1715),  assistant  from 
1700,  chief  from  1712,  Fux  (d.  1741),  assistant  from  1713,  chief  from 
1715,  Caldara  (d.  1736),  assistant  from  1716,  L.  A.  Predieri  (d.  1769), 
assistant  from  1726,  chief  in  1746-51,  Georg  Reutter,  Jr . (d.  1772),  assist- 
ant from  1746,  chief  from  1751,  F.  L.  Gassmann  (d.  1774),  chief  from  1772, 
and  Josef  Bonno  (d.  1788),  chief  from  1774.  The  title  of  court-com- 
poser was  held  by  Badia  in  1696-1738,  by  Fux  from  1698,  by  G.  B. 
Bononcini  in  1 700-1 1,  by  Francesco  Conti  in  1713-32,  by  Giuseppe  Porsile 
in  1720-40,  by  Reutter  in  1730-46,  by  Matteo  Pallota  in  1733-41  and 
1749-58,  by  Bonno  in  1739-74,  by  G.  C.  Wagenseil  in  1739-77,  and  by 
Gassnmnn  in  1763-72.  This  latter  office  yielded  no  special  salary  after 
1770,  but  the  title  continued  to  be  conferred,  as  upon  Gluck  in  1774-87 
and  upon  Mozart  in  1787-91. 

During  the  first  forty  years  of  the  century  the  most  influen- 
tial leader  was  Fux,  a composer  emphatically  of  the  old  Pale- 
strina school,  more  learned  than  original,  but  a theorist  and 
teacher  of  exceptional  ability,  as  well  as  an  organizer  who  knew 
how  to  hold  in  some  sort  of  harmony  the  diverse  elements  of 
the  large  imperial  musical  establishment.  Prominent  among 
his  coadjutors  were  the  Italians  Caldara,  F.  Conti  and  Porsile. 

Georg  Reutter  [Sr.]  (d.  1738)  served  at  St.  Stephen’s  as  organist  from 
1686,  and  as  choirmaster  from  1715,  while  at  the  court  he  was  theorbist  in 


THE  IMPERIAL  CHAPEL  267 

1697-1703  and  organist  from  1700.  His  works  are  confused  with  those  of 
his  more  talented  son  and  successor. 

Johann  Joseph  Fux  (d.  1741),  a Styrian  by  birth,  but  of  whose  early  train- 
ing nothing  is  known,  appeared  at  Vienna  as  organist  at  the  Schottenkirche 
in  1696-1702,  was  assistant  choirmaster  at  St.  Stephens  from  1705  and  chief 
from  1712,  and  in  court  service  as  composer  or  choirmaster  from  1698.  It  is 
curious  that  he  still  clung  to  the  old  mediaeval  system  of  modes  and  to  the 
strict  a cappella  methods  of  writing,  with  little  yielding  to  the  prevalent  ope- 
ratic and  homophonic  styles  (except  in  his  dramatic  experiments).  His  best 
works  were  all  sacred,  including  54  masses,  several,  like  the  Missa  canotiica 
(1718),  of  great  learning,  3 requiems,  2 Te  Deums,  many  motets  and  psalms, 
etc.,  with  10  oratorios  in  the  Italian  manner,  but  including  more  attention  to 
the  chorus.  He  also  wrote  8 operas  and  12  other  dramatic  works,  mostly  for 
court  festivities;  of  these  Costanza  e fortezza  (1723,  at  Prague)  was  the  most 
brilliant.  His  use  of  the  orchestra  was  vigorous  and  rich,  and  he  contributed 
worthily  to  chamber  music.  His  great  theoretical  work  was  the  Gradus  ad 
Parnassum  (1725),  which  remained  for  almost  a century  a standard  treatise. 

Antonio  Caldara  (d.  1736)  was  born  at  Venice  and  began  opera-writing 
there  as  early  as  1689.  Apart  from  brief  terms  at  Mantua  and  Rome,  his 
work  is  wholly  associated  with  Vienna,  where  he  was  greatly  admired.  Though 
most  fertile  in  operas  and  oratorios  (32  in  1712-35),  he  was  also  a strong 
writer  of  masses  and  other  church  music  in  contrapuntal  style,  with  many 
cantatas,  ranking  with  the  masters  of  the  Italian  school.  He  also  wrote  much 
secular  part-music  and  important  chamber  music. 

Carlo  Agostino  Badia  (d.  1738)  was  also  a Venetian,  well  trained,  but  of  no 
great  genius.  Besides  numerous  operas,  he  wrote  some  15  oratorios  (from 
1694)  and  many  cantatas. 

Francesco  Conti  (d.  1732)  came  from  Florence  in  his  twentieth  year  (1701), 
being  in  request  for  his  gifts  as  a theorbist.  Except  for  a period  of  eight  years 
(1705-13),  he  remained  in  the  imperial  service,  producing,  besides  operas  and 
serenatas,  9 Italian  oratorios  (1706-36)  and  over  50  cantatas.  His  style  fol- 
lowed that  of  Scarlatti. 

Gottlieb  Muffat  (d.  1770)  was  the  son  of  Georg  Muffat  (see  sec.  105), 
born  at  Passau.  He  was  trained  under  Fux  and  served  as  court-organist  and 
harpsichordist  in  1717-63.  His  works  include  valuable  fugues,  toccatas,  etc., 
for  the  organ,  besides  many  clavier-pieces. 

Matteo  Pallota  (d.  1758)  was  born  at  Palermo,  and  was  favorably  known  as 
a church  composer  by  1720,  though  not  called  to  Vienna  as  court-composer  till 
173 3.  Of  his  works  several  masses  and  motets  remain,  besides  a MS.  treatise 
on  Plain-Song. 

Georg  Reutter  [Jr.]  (d.  1772),  the  son  of  the  earlier  Reutter  above,  had 
a long  and  distinguished  career  at  St.  Stephen’s  and  the  court  from  about 
1725.  He  was  a facile  composer  of  some  brilliance,  especially  in  opera.  He 
left  a large  number  of  masses  and  motets,  with  8 oratorios  (1727-40).  He  dis- 
covered Haydn  in  1740  and  was  his  master  till  1749,  when  he  turned  him  off 
abruptly  because  his  voice  was  no  longer  available. 

Franz  Tuma  (d.  1774),  a Bohemian  theorbist,  studied  under  Czernohorsky 
of  Prague  and  Fux  of  Vienna,  was  choirmaster  to  the  Empress  Elizabeth  in 


268 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


1741-50,  and  was  later  connected  with  monasteries.  He  was  chiefly  a church 
composer,  with  about  30  excellent  masses  and  other  works,  besides  some 
instrumental  pieces. 

A few  other  Austrian  church  composers  should  be  mentioned,  such  as 
Bohuslaw  Czernohorsky  (d.  1740),  a Bohemian  Minorite,  who  worked  succes- 
sively at  Padua,  Assisi  and  finally  Prague,  and  who  was  not  only  a noted 
teacher  (as  of  Tartini,  Gluck  and  Tuma),  but  a superior  sacred  composer 
(works  mostly  destroyed  by  fire  in  1754)  ; and  Johann  Ernst  Eberlin  (d.  1762), 
a Swabian  of  whose  life  little  is  known  except  that  from  1 725  he  was  in  the 
service  of  the  Archbishop  of  Salzburg  as  organist  and  choirmaster,  and 
whose  able  organ  and  church  works,  including  fugues,  toccatas,  masses,  etc., 
and  13  oratorios,  rank  among  the  best  of  the  period. 

122.  In  Italy.  — As  will  be  seen,  the  spirit  and  methods  of  the 
opera  were  overwhelmingly  dominant  in  Italy  throughout  the 
century.  Between  these  and  the  older  ideals  of  a cappella  church 
music  there  was  a gap  so  wide  that  hardly  any  composers  could 
bridge  it  successfully.  A limited  number  essayed  to  resist  the 
prevailing  drift  toward  theatric  music  entirely  and  to  confine 
themselves  to  sacred  works  in  something  like  the  old  style,  but 
without  notable  success.  Many  of  the  leading  opera-writers, 
no  doubt,  were  diligent  composers  of  masses,  litanies,  psalms  and 
other  ritual  music,  but  only  a few  of  them  proved  fully  sensitive 
to  the  differences  between  church  and  concert  music,  or  equally 
expert  in  both.  Most  of  them,  however,  undertook  oratorios 
and  cantatas  upon  Biblical  subjects  or  episodes  in  the  legends 
of  the  saints,  but  the  reason  for  this  was  evidently  that  such 
works  called  for  methods  that  were  at  least  partially  dramatic. 

As  contrasted  with  their  German  contemporaries,  all  Italian 
composers  of  this  and  later  periods  show  the  lack  of  those 
remarkable  restraining  and  modifying  influences  in  sacred  writ- 
ing that  were  influential  in  northern  Europe.  They  had  behind 
them  no  such  traditions  of  majestic  organ  polyphony  or  of 
fervent  congregational  singing,  and  the  public  they  addressed 
was  not  permeated  by  any  similar  breadth  of  religious  thought- 
fulness or  depth  of  homely  piety.  The  conditions  of  their 
practical  work  were  different,  and  it  is  not  strange,  with  all 
their  artistic  ability,  that  their  church  compositions  seldom  rise 
to  the  height  of  permanent  value. 

In  the  following  notes,  details  are  given  only  where  the  emphasis  of  the 
composer’s  work  was  wholly  or  mainly  laid  upon  sacred  composition.  In 
other  cases  such  details  will  be  found  in  later  sections  regarding  the  opera. 


ITALIAN  CHURCH  MUSICIANS 


269 


Tommaso  Baj  (d.  1714),  a Bolognese  singer  in  the  Papal  Choir  from  the 
latter  part  of  the  17th  century,  is  almost  exclusively  known  by  the  beautiful 
Miserere  which  shares  with  those  of  G.  Allegri  and  of  Baini  the  honor  of  an- 
nual rendering  on  Good  Friday.  A few  other  works  remain  in  MS. 

Pompeo  Cannicciari  (d.  1744),  choirmaster  at  Sta.  Maria  Maggiore  in  Rome 
from  1709,  wrote  many  masses,  psalms  and  motets  in  strict  style  (from  c. 
1690). 

Francesco  Antonio  Vallotti  (d.  1780),  best  known  as  a learned  theorist 
(see  sec.  165),  made  his  first  reputation  as  an  organist  at  Padua  from  1722, 
being  considered  the  most  able  of  his  time  in  Italy,  and  was  also  a masterly 
writer  of  contrapuntal  church  music  (mostly  unpublished). 

Giambattista  Martini  (d.  1784),  still  better  known  as  the  most  important 
theorist  of  the  age  and  the  first  of  the  great  musical  historians  (see  sec.  165), 
became  choirmaster  at  Bologna  in  1 725  and  produced  from  that  time  a vast 
amount  of  church  music  of  every  description,  largely  in  the  pure  Roman  style, 
but  including  several  oratorios  and  cantatas  also.  He  further  wrote  nobly  for 
the  organ. 

To  these  may  be  added  the  names  of  Domenico  Zipoli,  a Neapolitan,  who 
was  organist  at  the  Jesuit  Church  in  Rome  from  1696  and  the  author  of  a col- 
lection of  organ-pieces  (1716);  Emanuele  d’Astorga  (d.  1736),  a native  of 
Palermo,  who  lived  a roving  life,  including  short  residences  in  Spain,  in  Eng- 
land, at  Parma,  at  Vienna,  and  finally  in  Bohemia,  and  who  wrote  over  100 
solo  cantatas  of  much  beauty,  with  a fine  Stabat  Mater  (1713);  Benedetto 
Marcello  (d.  1739), a well-born  Venetian  lawyer  and  official,  thoroughly  trained 
in  music  (though  he  called  himself  a dilettante),  who  wrote  a large  number  of 
solo  cantatas,  a famous  set  of  Psalms  (1724-7)  for  from  one  to  four  voices, 
together  with  chamber  music  and  part-songs ; and  Bartolomeo  Cordans  (d. 
1 757)?  from  1729  an  opera-writer,  but  from  1735  choirmaster  at  Udine,  where 
he  composed  an  incredible  amount  of  masses,  motets  and  psalms  in  a rather 
eccentric  style  (many  said  to  have  been  purposely  destroyed,  but  many  still 
preserved). 

Most  prolific  and  characteristic  in  the  field  of  church  music 
were  several  masters  of  the  Neapolitan  school,  all  of  them  re- 
nowned in  opera  (see  sec.  125).  While  they  tended  always  to 
depart  widely  from  the  patterns  of  the  earlier  time,  they  are  to 
be  ranked  with  the  great  Germans  for  successfully  effecting  a 
compromise  between  the  needs  of  the  form  of  church  worship 
with  which  they  were  connected  and  the  new  styles  of  composi- 
tion, without  altogether  throwing  away  the  dignity  and  ideality 
of  the  older  styles.  It  was  in  the  hands  of  this  group  of  writers 
especially  that  gradually  a new  conception  of  melody  began  to 
emerge — one  not  dependent  upon  either  a contrapuntal  or  a 
strenuous  and  restless  harmonic  sequence,  but  evolved  more 
fiowingly  and  simply  from  a plain  chord-series.  Melodies  of 
this  type,  though  apparently  devoid  of  learning,  were  more  and 


270 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


more  appreciated  as  genuine  vehicles  of  feeling,  suitable  for  the 
expression  of  both  religious  and  other  sentiments.  This  transi- 
tion opened  the  way  for  much  that  was  most  valuable  in  the  styles 
of  later  periods. 

Alessandro  Scarlatti  (d.  1725),  the  first  of  the  great  Neapolitans,  a pupil  of 
Carissimi  about  1680,  though  most  influential  through  his  operas,  was  even 
more  prolific  in  sacred  works.  He  cultivated  both  fields  at  once  from  the  out- 
set of  his  career  at  Rome.  Thoroughly  at  home  in  all  the  intricacies  of  coun- 
terpoint, he  held  his  own  with  the  best  Roman  masters  of  the  later  17th 
century,  and  was  esteemed  at  the  Papal  Chapel  and  at  Sta.  Maria  Maggiore 
(where  he  was  assistant  or  chief  choirmaster  in  1703-6).  He  is  said  to  have 
written  200  masses,  set  for  as  many  as  ten  voices,  a great  variety  of  psalms, 
motets  and  vespers,  with  literally  hundreds  of  cantatas,  mostly  solo,  and  10 
oratorios  (from  1693).  His  extraordinary  readiness  was  supported  by  ample 
learning  and  genuine  heartiness  of  feeling,  so  that  his  works  seldom  lack 
worth. 

Nicola  Fago  (d.  c.  1736)  was  a pupil  of  Scarlatti  and  of  Provenzale  at 
Naples,  succeeding  the  latter  as  teacher  at  one  of  the  conservatories.  Nu- 
merous church  works  (from  about  1700)  remain,  including  masses  and  motets, 
cantatas,  a Stabat  Mater  and  an  oratorio,  written  in  a good,  but  not  specially 
notable,  style. 

Niccolb  Porpora  (d.  1766),  the  most  famous  singing-teacher  of  his  day, 
though  working  ultimately  outside  of  Italy,  was  trained  at  Naples,  probably 
under  Scarlatti.  He  wrote  in  all  the  usual  sacred  forms,  including  many  can- 
tatas and  6 oratorios  {Sta.  Eugenia , 1721,  being  the  most  famous).  His  gifts 
as  a vocal  expert  show  in  the  suave  writing  of  his  cantatas  (see  sec.  125). 

Francesco  Durante  (d.  1755)  w'as  also  a Neapolitan,  studying  under  Greco 
and  Scarlatti,  succeeding  the  latter  as  teacher  and  educating  a multitude  of 
great  pupils.  Being  without  dramatic  ambitions,  he  devoted  himself  to  sacred 
composition,  leaving  a great  number  of  works  in  all  forms,  elegantly  and  at- 
tractively written,  but,  except  for  their  harmonic  richness,  not  particularly 
strong.  His  repute  throughout  Europe,  however,  is  attested  by  the  unusually 
wide  distribution  of  his  works.  His  best-known  work  is  a Magnificat  in  B. 

Leonardo  Leo  (d.  1744),  ten  years  younger  than  Durante,  was  a pupil  of 
Scarlatti,  Fago  and  the  Roman  master  Pitoni,  and  served  as  choirmaster  at 
Naples  from  1716  and  also  as  the  teacher  of  several  noted  pupils.  His  ablest 
work  was  in  opera  (see  sec.  125),  but  he  also  wrote  abundantly  for  the 
church  in  a rich  and  imposing  style,  his  chef  d'ceuvre  being  an  a cappella 
Miserere  for  double  choir.  He  wrote  4 oratorios  (1713-32)  and  some  fugues 
for  organ. 

Francesco  Feo  (d.  after  1740)  studied  under  the  singing-master  Gizzi  and 
with  Pitoni  of  Rome.  Though  the  composer  of  6 operas,  he  is  better  known 
for  considerable  sacred  music,  chiefly  in  the  Roman  manner,  with  one 
oratorio. 

Pasquale  Cafaro  (d.  1 787)  was  the  pupil  and  successor  of  Leo  as  teacher, 
and,  like  him,  was  a church  composer  as  well  as  opera-writer,  his  best  wrork 
being  a Stabat  Mater  (1785). 


ENGLISH  CHURCH  MUSICIANS 


2fl 

Giovanni  Battista  Pergolesi  (d.  1736),  pupil  of  Greco,  Durante  and  Feo, 
though  his  career  was  very  short  (see  sec.  126),  won  renown  for  the  simple 
and  unaffected  charm  of  his  church  works  (from  1731),  of  which  a Stabat 
Mater  for  two  voices  (finished  just  before  his  death)  and  a Salve  Regina  are 
the  best. 

Later  composers  of  this  group,  whose  works  fell  mostly  in  the  middle  or 
latter  half  of  the  century,  were  the  great  Jommelli  (d.  1774),  who  was  from 
1749  choirmaster  at  St.  Peter’s  in  Rome  and  from  1754  in  Wurttemberg  (see 
sec.  125),  Perez  (d.  after  1782),  and  Abos  (d.  1786). 

123.  In  England. — The  declining  school  of  English  church 
music  has  nothing  to  show  in  the  18th  century  that  compares 
with  Germany  or  Italy.  The  taste  for  services  and  anthems  of 
the  ‘ verse  ’ or  solo  sort,  which  set  in  powerfully  towards  the 
end  of  the  17th  century,  continued,  though  for  a time  -it  was 
slightly  offset  by  the  genius  of  a few  worthy  choral  writers, 
mostly  in  the  Chapel  Royal.  That  there  was  vitality  left  in 
English  church  music  is  evidenced  by  the  fact  that  Handel  con- 
tributed to  it  to  a small  extent.  But  before  the  middle  of  the  cen- 
tury came  a period  of  barrenness  in  which  musicians  were  more 
interested  in  glee-writing  than  in  anthems  and  when  the  latter 
were  largely  concocted  by  adaptation  from  various  sources. 

Among  the  more  prolific  anthem-writers  whose  work  began  before  1700 
were  James  Hawkins  (d.  1729),  organist  at  Ely  from  1682,  with  75  verse  and 
full  anthems;  Vaughan  Richardson  (d.  1729),  pupil  of  Blow  and  organist  at 
Winchester  from  1693,  with  21  anthems;  John  Weldon  (d.  1736),  pupil  of 
Purcell  and  organist  at  Oxford  from  1694,  and  from  1701  connected  with  the 
Chapel  Royal,  succeeding  Blow  as  organist  in  1708  and  named  ‘ composer’ 
from  1715,  besides  serving  at  two  of  the  city  churches,  with  35  anthems,  some 
of  which  are  still  prized ; and  John  Goldwin  (d.  1719),  pupil  and  in  1697  suc- 
cessor of  Child  at  Windsor,  with  24  anthems. 

William  Croft  (d.  1727),  trained  in  the  Chapel  Royal  under  Blow  and  its 
organist  from  1704,  besides  being  organist  at  Westminster  and  choirmaster 
in  the  Chapel  Royal,  was  the  composer  of  nearly  100  anthems  (30  published 
in  1724),  written  mostly  in  a manly  and  sterling  style.  From  1700  to  1703 
he  also  wrote  some  incidental  theatric  music. 

Maurice  Greene  (d.  1755),  a pupil  of  King  at  St.  Paul’s,  where  from  1718 
he  was  organist,  followed  Croft  in  1727  as  organist  and  composer  to  the 
Chapel  Royal,  and  Tudway  in  1730  as  professor  of  music  at  Cambridge. 
Accounted  the  leading  church  musician  in  England,  and  for  a time  the  inti- 
mate friend  of  Handel,  he  is  known  by  almost  100  anthems,  often  of  decided 
strength  (especially  40  published  in  1743),  a service  and  a Te  Deum,  2 ora- 
torios (1737,  ’44),  3 light  operas  (1737-48),  many  songs  and  catches,  etc. 
He  assisted  in  founding  the  Royal  Society  of  Musicians  in  1738.  His  collec- 
tion of  Cathedral  Music  was  completed  by  Boyce. 


272 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


Minor  composers  of  the  period  were  James  Kent  (d.  1776),  pupil  and  close 
imitator  of  Croft,  organist  at  Cambridge  from  1731  and  at  Winchester  from 
1 737,  with  23  anthems  and  2 services  ; John  Stanley  (d.  1 786),  a famous  blind 
organist  in  London  from  1724  (at  the  Temple  Church  from  1734),  a pupil  of 
Greene  and  a warm  admirer  of  Handel,  with  6 anthems,  3 oratorios  (1757-74), 
organ  and  chamber  works  ; John  Travers  (d.  1758),  pupil  of  Greene  and  Pe- 
pusch,  organist  in  London  from  1725  and  at  the  Chapel  Royal  from  173 7,  with 
25  anthems,  a service,  a Psalter,  and  a favorite  set  of  part-songs ; William 
Hayes  (d.  1777),  organist  at  Shrewsbury  from  1729,  at  Worcester  from  1731, 
at  Magdalen  College,  Oxford,  from  1734  and  professor  of  music  there  from 
1742,  with  45  anthems  and  many  secular  pieces  ; James  Nares  (d.  1783),  pupil 
of  Pepusch,  organist  at  York  from  1734  and  in  1756  Greene’s  successor  at  the 
Chapel  Royal,  with  53  anthems,  2 services,  many  harpsichord-pieces,  etc. ; and 
John  Alcock  (d.  1806),  pupil  of  Stanley,  organist  in  London  from  1738,  at 
Lichfield  in  1748-60,  etc.,  with  38  anthems,  3 services  and  considerable  secu- 
lar music. 

William  Boyce  (d.  1779),  pupil  of  King,  Greene  and  Pepusch,  began  his 
active  career  as  organist  in  1734  in  London,  became  composer  to  the  Chapel 
Royal  in  1736  and  its  organist  in  1758,  was  conductor  of  the  Three  Choirs 
(West  England)  for  several  years  from  1737,  became  increasingly  deaf  and 
turned  much  to  editorial  work.  His  compositions  include  about  70  anthems, 
5 services,  2 oratorios,  several  masques  and  odes  (from  1734)  many  songs  and 
similar  pieces,  and  some  chamber  music.  His  style  was  solid  and  noble,  often 
with  picturesque  color  and  beauty.  He  is  commonly  ranked  as  the  last  of  the 
older  group  of  masters.  He  is  gratefully  remembered  for  a great  collection  of 
Cathedral  Music  (3  vols.,  1760-78),  the  materials  for  which  were  partly  col- 
lected by  Greene  and  bequeathed  by  him  to  Boyce. 

It  is  notable  that  none  of  these  contemporaries  of  Handel  showed  a marked 
tendency  to  imitate  his  style. 


CHAPTER  XVI 


THE  CULMINATION  OF  THE  EARLY  ITALIAN  OPERA 

124.  The  Completed  Art-Form.  — In  spite  of  undeniable 
genius  on  the  part  of  several  opera-writers  in  the  17th  century, 
with  their  hundreds  of  works,  that  century  was  little  more  than 
a time  of  experimentation.  It  was  only  toward  its  close  that 
the  form  of  the  opera  became  definitely  settled  by  a consensus 
of  usage.  The  particular  form  chosen  was  due  to  a variety  of 
considerations,  partly  artistic  from  a really  dramatic  or  musical 
point  of  view,  and  partly  due  to  the  demand  of  the  public  for  an 
exciting  entertainment,  whether  highly  artistic  or  not.  Out  of 
these  combined  influences  a strangely  rigid  set  of  rules  for 
procedure  was  developed  by  which  both  librettists  and  com- 
posers were  governed,  sometimes  in  defiance  of  dramatic  sense 
and  truth.  The  observance  of  these  rules  was  general  during 
the  early  18th  century,  and  certain  features  resulting  from 
them  continued  into  the  19th.  It  must  be  admitted  that  the 
plan  adopted  had  points  of  practical  effectiveness,  however  it 
may  be  judged  as  a type  of  strict  dramatic  art.  At  all  events, 
as  a popular  form  it  was  enormously  successful  for  the  time. 

The  musical  elements  contributed  by  the  17th  century  were 
the  recitative  as  the  best  method  of  developing  active  situations 
and  expressing  trains  or  sequences  of  feeling,  the  aria  as  the 
lyrical  embodiment  of  moments  of  peculiar  interest  or  states  of 
intense  emotion  on  the  part  of  individual  characters,  and  the 
orchestral  accompaniment,  lending  color  and  vividness  of  char- 
acterization and  enhancing  the  interest  of  all  vocal  numbers, 
besides  occasionally  enriching  the  plot  by  purely  instrumental 
numbers.  The  chorus  remained  almost  unutilized  except  in  a 
subordinate  and  artificial  fashion,  and  ensemble  effects  of 
many  voices  were  for  the  time  rare.  Scenery  and  costuming, 
with  many  stage  accessories  and  devices,  were  employed  lav- 
ishly, often  with  more  spectacular  singularity  than  the  highest 
taste  could  approve. 


T 


273 


274 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


The  recitatives  were  either  ‘ secco,’  supported  only  at  intervals  by  a 
few  chords  on  the  harpsichord,  or  ‘ stromentato,1  accompanied  through- 
out by  various  instruments  in  forms  having  some  musical  individuality 
of  their  own.  In  the  former  style,  declamation  was  utilized  in  any  way 
that  the  story  or  the  character  speaking  happened  to  suggest,  and  ranged 
all  the  way  from  simple  narration  or  conversation  up  to  passionate  dec- 
lamation. In  the  latter  style,  the  recitative  verged  more  or  less  upon  the 
‘ arioso 1 or  informal  song,  in  which  rapid  or  vehement  advance  in  the 
plot  was  less  possible. 

The  arias  had  come  to  be  cast  usually  in  the  da  capo  form  — a first 
section  mainly  in  the  principal  key  and  some  homogeneous  manner,  a 
second  section  contrasted  with  the  first  in  key  and  manner,  and  a third 
section  which  was  either  a repetition  of  the  first  or  an  intensified  variant 
of  it.  This  type  of  solo  has  great  values  as  a purely  musical  form,  and 
is  cognate  with  the  longer  song-forms  generally,  but  it  has  obvious 
dramatic  drawbacks  if  used  too  persistently  and  stiffly,  since,  if  its  text 
harmonizes  with  it,  it  arrests  action  and  exaggerates  emphasis  on  some 
single  incident,  situation  or  sentiment.  For  musical  reasons,  also,  in 
this  early  usage  not  only  were  arias  introduced  by  a short  instrumental 
prelude  or  1 sinfonia,’  but  at  intervals  in  each  of  the  sections,  especially 
the  first,  interludes  or  ‘ ritornelli 1 were  inserted,  echoing  or  imitating  the 
melodic  figures  of  the  vocal  part.  These  instrumental  expansions  in- 
creased the  musical  interest  of  the  whole,  regarded  as  a highly  developed 
song,  but  also  increased  the  difficulty  of  its  satisfactory  dramatic  applica- 
tion. Arias  were  properly  solos,  but  duets  in  similar  form  gradually 
became  recognized  as  affording  room  for  musical  and  dramatic  climax. 
In  such  duets  the  voice-parts  were  often  handled  in  somewhat  exact 
contrapuntal  fashion. 

As  media  for  expression,  arias  tended  to  fall  into  somewhat  distinct 
classes  according  to  their  melodic  and  harmonic  treatment  and  their  con- 
sequent fitness  for  certain  types  of  feeling.  Thus,  the  ‘aria  cantabile’ 
was  characterized  by  a flowing  melody,  usually  in  slow  tempo,  with  few 
skips,  and  supported  by  compact  harmony,  expressive  of  placid  or 
meditative  emotion ; the  ‘ aria  di  portamento 1 was  similar,  but  with  a 
much  bolder  melody,  marked  by  sweeping  skips  and  more  prominent 
accents,  expressive  of  heightened,  but  not  agitated,  feeling;  the  ‘aria  di 
mezzo  carattere  ’ was  more  declamatory  or  descriptive  in  the  voice-part 
and  usually  provided  with  an  accompaniment  of  greater  importance, 
particular  species  being  the  ‘aria  parlante’  or  talking  aria,  in  which  the 
forcible  enunciation  of  the  text  was  the  special  feature,  the  ‘ aria  all 
unisono,1  in  which  the  voice  was  either  unsupported  altogether  or  merely 
doubled  by  a few  instruments,  and  which  depended  for  its  effectiveness 
upon  the  vigor  and  harmonic  suggestiveness  of  the  melody  alone,  and  the 
‘aria  d’imitazione  ’ or  imitative  aria,  in  which  a point  was  made  of  the 
imitation  (usually  more  in  the  accompaniment  than  in  the  voice)  of  such 
sounds  as  those  of  bird-song,  moving  water,  festal  pomp  or  warfare ; and 
the  ‘aria  di  bravura’  or  ‘d’agilitk,’  in  which  every  device  of  vocal 
virtuosity  was  employed,  including  elaborate  runs  or  ‘ divisions,’  pro- 


THE  CONCERT-OPERA 


275 


longed  and  intricate  figures  or  ‘ roulades 1 to  single  syllables,  every  sort  of 
embellishment,  like  grace-notes,  trills  and  turns,  and  rapid  variations  or 
contrasts  of  register,  with  tones  at  the  extremes  of  the  vocal  compass. 
The  ‘ aria  parlante  1 might  also  pass  over  under  certain  dramatic  con- 
ditions into  the  ‘aria  strepitosa  1 or  1 aria  infuriata,1  in  which  the  acme  of 
agitation  or  of  violent  passion  was  expressed.  So  urgent  was  the  demand 
for  all  these  types  as  exhibitions  of  vocal  dexterity  that  it  became  the 
rule  that  in  each  main  division  of  an  opera  there  should  be  at  least  one 
example  of  each  of  the  principal  classes,  and  also  that  no  two  successive 
arias  should  come  from  the  same  class.  The  principal  singers  in  the  cast 
acquired  the  right  to  have  opportunity  to  parade  themselves  in  all  the 
more  difficult  and  showy  forms,  especially  in  the  final  portion  of  the 
work,  and  usually  the  climax  of  interest  included  a grand  duet  between 
the  leading  characters.  All  these  conventional  usages  arose  from  the 
popular  conception  of  the  musical  drama  as  a grand  concert-entertainment 
rather  than  a drama  pure  and  simple. 

The  use  of  the  orchestra  also  tended  to  become  stereotyped.  At  the 
opening  of  a work  was  usually  an  overture  of  varied  dimensions.  Some- 
times it  was  a mere  tonal  introduction  in  but  one  movement,  but  in 
larger  works  it  consisted  of  three  to  four  movements,  each  of  a distinct 
character.  Two  main  types  of  overture  were  distinguished,  the  French, 
which  originated  with  Lully,  having  a first  movement  in  full  harmony, 
stately  and  even  grandiose,  the  second  in  quick  tempo,  more  or  less 
fugal  and  with  more  distinction  of  instruments,  the  third  a flowing 
melody  in  moderate  tempo,  and  the  fourth,  if  present,  a dance  like  a 
gavotte  or  minuet ; and  the  Italian,  which  was  first  established  by 
Scarlatti,  having  a first  movement  in  quick  and  incisive  style,  a second 
like  the  third  above,  and  a third  again  quick  and  often  contrapuntal. 
The  relation  of  the  overture  to  the  topic  and  spirit  of  the  work  as  a 
whole  was  so  slight  that  overtures  were  often  transferred  from  work  to 
work,  and  even  from  operas  to  oratorios.  Besides  the  overture,  oppor- 
tunities were  seized  to  introduce  instrumental  numbers  into  the  progress 
of  the  action,  such  as  marches,  dances,  pictorial  scenes  — anything  to 
enhance  the  tonal  variety  and  interest.  Accompaniments  were  more  and 
more  made  a special  study,  particularly  as  the  capacities  of  the  orchestra 
became  better  understood.  Yet  they  were  strictly  accompaniments, 
designed  to  support  and  set  off  the  voice,  rather  than  to  supply  an  inde- 
pendent development  of  the  dramatic  situation  in  any  large  way.  The 
harpsichord  remained  the  basis  or  centre  for  the  whole  ensemble,  filling 
in  all  harmonic  gaps  and  often  serving  alone. 

The  general  plan  of  disposing  the  dramatic  and  musical  re- 
sources involved  properly  three  or  four  male  and  three  female 
characters,  the  hero  or  ‘ primo  uomo  ’ being  a high  tenor  and 
the  heroine  or  ‘ prima  donna  ’ a soprano  — the  latter  until  well 
on  into  the  18th  century  being  an  artificial  male  soprano,  since 
the  opposition  to  women-singers  on  the  stage  was  outgrown  only 


276 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


with  difficulty.  Voices  of  low  register,  such  as  altos  and  basses, 
were  not  considered  important.  The  chorus  was  little  more  than 
a piece  of  stage-furnishing,  performing  in  dumb  show  for  the 
most  part.  The  plot  was(  regularly  laid  out  in  three  acts,  each 
composed  of  alternate  recitatives  and  arias  in  long  series  — some- 
times as  many  as  twenty  to  an  act.  At  the  end  of  the  whole  or 
of  each  act  a madrigal  or  dance  in  ensemble  was  used  some- 
what like  an  epilogue ; occasionally  similar  numbers  served  as 
prologues.  Except  for  these  and  the  orchestral  numbers,  if  any, 
the  play  might  consist  entirely  of  solos. 

Obviously,  a plan  like  this  was  hostile  to  dramatic  freedom 
and  truth.  Librettists  were  constrained  to  force  every  story  into 
a single  mould  and  to  prepare  their  lines  wholly  with  reference 
to  the  arbitrary  musical  schedule  in  view.  The  subjects  most 
in  vogue  were  those  of  ancient  history  or  mediaeval  romance, 
and  the  same  story  was  worked  again  and  again.  Naturally, 
the  texts  were  of  the  most  mechanical  and  tasteless  description. 
Composers  were  equally  constrained  on  the  dramatic  side,  and 
were  forced  to  win  success  by  a one-sided  cultivation  of  sensuous 
or  sensational  melody  alone. 

The  early  Italian  opera,  therefore,  was  simply  a concert- 
scheme  of  great  artificiality,  designed  to  provide  an  arena  for 
the  display  of  virtuoso  vocalists.  It  was  perhaps  a natural  re- 
action from  the  pedantry  and  heaviness  of  the  contrapuntal 
period,  but  as  a reaction  it  was  extreme.  If  in  the  18th  century 
new  ideas  had  not  presently  made  themselves  felt,  the  opera 
would  never  have  ranked  as  a great  art-form. 

The  trade  of  librettist  flourished  long  and  was  lucrative,  since  new 
texts  were  in  demand.  But  it  had  little  to  attract  poets  of  merit  until 
the  opera  began  to  break  away  from  its  conventional  rigidity.  Early  in 
the  1 8th  century,  however,  three  court-poets  at  Vienna  secured  renown 
by  works  of  real  power,  namely,  Silvio  StaiJiftiglia  (d.  1725),  a Roman 
by  birth  who  worked  at  Vienna  from  about  1700  till  1711  ; Apostolo  Zeno 
(d.  1750),  a Venetian  at  Vienna  till  about  1730;  and,  more  influential 
still,  Pietro  Trapassi  or  Metastasio  (d.  1782),  a Roman  who  was  court- 
poet  at  Vienna  for  a half-century  from  1730,  the  author  of  about  35  libret- 
tos. 

The  position  of  opera-singer  was  one  of  enormous  eclat  and  pecuniary 
profit.  It  presupposed  decided  vocal  gifts,  developed  by  the  most  ex- 
acting discipline,  which  often  involved  no  slight  genuine  musicianship. 
The  vocal  accomplishments  demanded  were  astonishing,  but  a capacity 
for  tours  de  force  was  more  valued  than  artistic  endowment.  Under  the 


THE  CONCERT-OPERA  2 77 

old  regime  the  arrogance  and  conceit  of  singers  were  proverbial.  The 
general  employment  of  ‘ evirati 1 for  female  parts  was  demoralizing. 

The  work  of  the  singing-master  naturally  became  of  the  utmost  impor- 
tance, and  many  notable  composers  were  equally  famous  as  trainers.  The 
greatest  teacher  of  the  century  was  undoubtedly  Porpora  (d.  1766). 

The  above  description  applies  to  the  traditional  dramma  per 
musica  or  ‘ opera  seria  ’ — the  serious  or  tragic  opera.  Gradu- 
ally, as  will  be  seen,  there  branched  off  from  this  another  form, 
the  ‘ opera  buffa  ’ or  comic  opera,  which  was  a revolt  from  the 
mechanical  plan  and  the  sentimental  monotony  of  the  opera 
seria.  In  the  opera  buffa  many  of  the  old  rules  were  delib- 
erately set  aside,  and  thus  the  way  made  easier  for  the  recon- 
struction of  the  serious  opera  that  occurred  after  1750. 

Many  light  works  were  often  written,  often  in  one  act  and  for  but  two 
or  three  soloists,  in  which  all  sorts  of  deviations  from  rules  were  practised. 
Common  names  for  such  works  were  1 serenata,1  * festa  teatrale,’  etc.  In 
Germany  the  singspiel  was  not  abandoned,  while  in  France  the  ballet 
was  decidedly  popular,  as  was  the  masque  in  England.  In  England,  too, 
the  ‘ ballad-opera  ’ had  a sudden  vogue.  All  these  implied  some  degree 
of  dissatisfaction  with  the  fixed  form  of  the  typical  Italian  opera. 

Furthermore,  what  is  here  said  applies  strictly  only  to  that 
form  of  opera  which  was  essentially  Italian,  especially  that  which 
during  the  first  half  of  the  18th  century  emanated  from  Naples 
or  was  under  the  sway  of  its  school.  The  Neapolitan  opera  was 
the  direct  descendant  of  the  Venetian,  and  the  latter  continued 
in  active  existence,  though  not  so  impressive  in  its  personnel  as 
it  had  been.  With  these  two  Italian  centres  Vienna  was  closely 
associated.  Operas  written  in  Italian  were  also  produced  abun- 
dantly at  several  points  in  northern  and  western  Europe, 
notably  at  Dresden,  Hamburg,  Paris  and  London.  In  many 
cases  these  were  similar  to  those  produced  in  Italy.  But  there 
was  an  evident  tendency  to  modify  the  Italian  type  in  directions 
determined  by  other  ideas,  so  that  German,  French  and  English 
writers  should  be  regarded  somewhat  by  themselves,  especially 
as  operas  in  the  languages  of  these  countries  now  began  to  be 
numerous. 

125.  The  Rise  of  the  Neapolitan  School.  — The  brilliance  of 
the  operatic  development  at  Naples  from  about  1700  was  due 
to  the  genius  of  a series  of  masters,  of  whom  Alessandro 
Scarlatti  was  the  first  and  one  of  the  ablest.  But  behind  this 


278 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


leadership  lay  an  awakened  popular  enthusiasm  under  the  in- 
fluence of  the  four  conservatories  already  mentioned  (sec.  91), 
with  possibly  some  stimulus  from  altered  political  conditions. 

The  Kingdom  of  Naples,  founded  in  the  13th  century,  was  ruled  by 
Spain  throughout  the  16th  and  17th,  often  with  much  oppression.  In 
the  War  of  the  Spanish  Succession,  Naples  passed  over  to  Austria  (1707), 
and  in  1735  regained  its  relative  independence  and  its  intellectual  im- 
portance under  Charles  I. 

Although  data  as  to  Scarlatti’s  early  training  are  meagre,  it  is 
clear  that  he  was  thoroughly  grounded  in  the  harmonic  and 
contrapuntal  learning  of  his  age  and  was  able  to  handle  it  in  tradi- 
tional forms.  His  eminence,  however,  was  due  to  his  gifts  as  a 
melodist  and  his  instinct  for  the  ordering  of  extended  operatic 
works  so  as  to  achieve  a maximum  of  sustained  interest.  While 
not  himself  the  inventor  of  the  main  types  of  operatic  procedure, 
he  is  commonly  regarded  as  the  father  of  the  completed  opera 
seria  — certainly  one  of  its  earliest  and  most  successful  ex- 
ponents. He  was  influential,  also,  as  a teacher  and  the  stimulator 
of  other  geniuses.  Thus  around  him  grew  up  a circle  of  gifted 
artists,  who  together  gave  a memorable  impetus  to  composition. 
Though  the  salient  feature  of  the  opera  at  this  stage  was  its 
attention  to  affecting  and  distinctive  melody,  yet  the  structure 
of  melody  was  still  so  closely  associated  with  polyphonic  pro- 
cedure that  broad  musicianship  was  required  at  every  point. 
It  is  noticeable  that  almost  all  the  Neapolitan  opera-writers  were 
writers  of  noble  church  music  as  well,  in  styles  that  show  their 
descent  from  the  masters  of  the  preceding  century. 

Alessandro  Scarlatti  (d.  1725)  was  born  in  1659  at  Trapani  (Sicily).  He 
is  supposed  to  have  studied  at  one  of  the  schools  at  Naples  and  also  under 
Carissimi  at  Rome  (before  1674).  In  1680  he  produced  an  opera  at  Rome 
under  the  patronage  of  the  well-known  Christina,  ex-queen  of  Sweden,  whose 
choirmaster  he  was  till  1689.  Soon  after,  he  became  choirmaster  to  the 
Spanish  Viceroy  at  Naples,  but  returned  to  Rome  in  1703  to  assist  Foggia  at 
Sta.  Maria  Maggiore,  succeeding  him  there  in  1707.  In  1709  he  went  again 
to  Naples,  was  visited  there  by  Handel,  was  teacher  at  three  of  the  con- 
servatories successively,  and  was  for  a short  time  royal  choirmaster  under  the 
new  regime.  It  is  not  clear  that  he  ever  traveled,  except  to  visit  Venice  in 
1707,  where  he  produced  two  operas.  His  musicianship  was  many-sided,  for 
he  was  eminent  as  singer,  harpsichordist,  teacher,  conductor  and  composer  in 
every  style  then  in  use.  His  most  famous  pupils  were  his  son  Domenico 
Scarlatti,  Durante,  Leo,  Greco,  Feo,  Logroscino  and  Hasse.  His  handling 
of  the  orchestra  won  the  astonished  praise  of  Corelli.  His  methods  and  style 


SCARLATTI  AND  THE  NEAPOLITAN  OPERA 


279 


contributed  much  to  Handel’s  development,  and  his  works  secured  him  uni- 
versal renown  among  thoughtful  critics.  His  fertility  of  composition  verges 
upon  the  incredible.  Besides  his  almost 
innumerable  sacred  works  (including 
200  masses),  he  wrote  at  least  1 1 5 operas 
(Griselda,  1721,  being  numbered  114), 
mostly  for  Naples,  but  some  for  Rome  ; 
of  these  only  about  one-third  are  extant. 

Among  the  most  famous  are  La  Rosaura 
(1690),  Teodor  a (1693),  La  caduta  de' 

Dece7nviri  (1697),  Laodicea  e Berenice 
(1701),  11  Medo  (1708)  and  Tigrane 
(1715).  While  his  usual  plan  included 
little  more  than  a series  of  arias,  with  a 
rare  duet  or  terzet,  strung  together  with 
recitatives,  without  much  dramatic  con- 
tinuity or  special  characterization  of  the 
personages,  the  vigor  and  beauty  of  his 
arias  is  generally  notable,  the  recitatives 
are  often  fully  accompanied,  and  the 
orchestral  writing,  especially  for  the 
strings,  is  able  and  enterprising.  His  liking  for  the  da  capo  form  of  aria  did 
much  to  establish  that  form.  Wind  instruments  he  used  sparingly,  because 
not  satisfied  with  their  purity  of  intonation.  His  overtures,  usually  in  three 
movements,  with  a slow  movement  between  two  quick  ones,  fixed  a type  that 
rivaled  that  of  Lully  in  popularity.  Besides  his  operas,  he  wrote  many  secular 
cantatas,  serenatas  and  madrigals,  besides  a number  of  oratorios. 

Other  opera-writers  of  this  early  time  were  Francesco  Mancini  (d.  1739),  a 
good  teacher,  assistant  royal  choirmaster  from  1709  and  chief  from  1728,  with 
20  operas  from  1697  (as  Ariovisto , 1702)  and  4 oratorios  ; Domenico  Sarri  (d. 
after  1741),  Mancini’s  successor  at  court,  with  over  15  popular  operas  and  some 
oratorios  from  1702  (as  Didone  abbandonata,  1724)  ; Domenico  Scarlatti  (d. 
1 757),  the  great  harpsichordist  (see  sec.  140),  with  a few  operas  from  1704; 
and  Nicola  Fago  (d.  c.  1736),  an  eminent  teacher  and  sacred  composer,  with 
several  operas  from  about  1709  (as  Eustachio ) and  an  oratorio. 

Niccold  Porpora  (d.  1766)  was  born  at  Naples  in  1686  and  studied  at  one  of 
the  conservatories  under  Greco  and  Mancini.  His  first  three  operas  ap- 
peared in  1 709-1 1,  including  one  at  Rome.  About  1711  he  began  to  be 
known  as  an  expert  singing-teacher,  and  the  renown  of  his  many  pupils, 
like  Farinelli,  Caffarelli,  Senesino  and  others,  indicates  his  efficiency.  Later 
he  resumed  opera-writing,  largely  for  Rome  and  Venice,  and  in  1733  was 
called  to  London  to  assist  in  the  combination  against  Handel,  but  without 
great  success.  From  1736  he  was  at  the  head  of  one  of  the  music-schools  of 
Venice,  and  from  about  1745  taught  at  Vienna,  where  Haydn  sought  his  help. 
From  1748  to  1750  he  competed  unsuccessfully  with  Hasse  at  Dresden,  and  ulti- 
mately returned  to  Naples.  Altogether  he  wrote  about  45  operas  and  several 
oratorios,  characterized  by  little  real  genius,  though  considerable  cleverness, 
particularly  in  the  orchestration.  Some  solo  cantatas  rank  higher  because  of 


280 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


their  adaptation  to  the  voice.  He  was  a master  of  the  art  of  vocalization,  the 
typical  exponent  of  the  old  Italian  school  of  singing. 

Other  important  singing-teachers  were  Domenico  Gizzi  (d.  1745),  and  his 
pupil  Francesco  Feo  (d.  after  1740),  an  accomplished  composer  of  church 
music,  6 operas  (1713-31)  and  an  oratorio  (1739),  his  learning  and  versa- 
tility giving  him  much  renown. 

Francesco  Durante  (d.  1755),  though  not  himself  a secular  composer  (see 
sec.  122),  stands  with  Scarlatti  and  Leo  as  a leader  in  shaping  the  Neapolitan 
style,  because  under  him  as  head  of  one  of  the  conservatories  were  trained 
almost  all  the  versatile  opera- writers  by  whom  that  style  became  powerful 
throughout  Europe.  His  influence  told  for  clearness  and  elegance  of  melody, 
with  attention  to  breadth  and  brilliance  of  general  effect.  He  helped  also 
to  raise  the  standard  of  orchestral  writing,  especially  as  concerns  the  wind 
parts. 

Leonardo  Leo  (d.  1744),  born  near  Naples  in  1694,  pupil  of  Fago  and  Scar- 
latti at  Naples  and  of  Pitoni  at  Rome,  won  renown  by  an  oratorio  in  1712  and 
an  opera  in  1714,  rapidly  advanced  as  a teacher  and  was  welcomed  as  a gifted 
composer.  Among  his  many  pupils  were  Pergolesi,  Jommelli  and  Piccinni. 
Besides  excellent  sacred  music  (see  sec.  122),  he  wrote  about  60  operatic 
works,  with  a few  oratorios,  in  a style  of  expressiveness  and  charm,  rising 
often  to  grandeur  and  passion.  His  success  extended  to  other  Italian  cities 
besides  Naples.  In  the  handling  of  the  orchestra  he  surpassed  Scarlatti,  as 
well  as  in  suavity  of  melody.  He  often  utilized  texts  by  librettists  like  Zeno 
and  Metastasio. 

Giuseppe  Porsile  (d.  1750),  born  at  Naples,  after  serving  for  a short  time 
at  the  Spanish  court,  from  about  1711  was  at  Vienna,  employed  by  the  Em- 
press Amalie.  In  1715,  at  the  suggestion  of  Fux,  he  entered  the  Imperial 
Chapel,  where  from  1720  he  was  i composer.’  His  works  (from  1719)  were 
almost  wholly  dramatic,  including  perhaps  20  operas  or  similar  works  (as 
Sfiartaco,  1726)  and  13  oratorios  (as  Giuseppe  riconosciuto,  1733),  all  written 
for  Vienna  and  representing  a fusion  of  styles. 

Leonardo  Vinci  (d.  1732),  a pupil  of  Greco,  for  a time  royal  choirmaster  at 
Naples,  and  finally  a monk,  left  a surprising  number  of  works,  almost  all  dra- 
matic (from  1719),  which  were  very  popular,  especially  at  Naples  and  Venice. 
They  include  nearly  40  operas,  the  earlier  comic  (as  Lo  cecato  fauzo,  1719), 
and  the  later  serious  (as  Ifigenia  in  Tauride  and  Astianaite,  1725),  besides 
oratorios  and  some  church  music. 

Other  composers  after  1725  include  Girolamo  Abos  (d.  1786),  a pupil  of  Leo 
and  Durante,  with  14  operas  (from  1730)  at  Naples,  Venice,  Rome,  London, 
etc.;  Francesco  Araja  (d.  c.  1767),  who  was  at  St.  Petersburg  in  1735-59, 
with  over  10  operas  (from  1730),  first  at  Florence,  Rome  and  Venice,  but 
mostly  at  the  Russian  court,  including  (1751-5)  the  first  operas  in  Russian ; 
Gaetano  Latilla  (d.  c.  1789),  pupil  of  Gizzi,  for  a time  from  1738  choirmaster 
at  Sta.  Maria  Maggiore  in  Rome  and  from  1756  teacher  at  Venice,  later  at 
Naples,  with  over  35  operas  (from  1732);  Nicola  Sala  (d.  1800),  famous  as 
a theorist  (see  sec.  165),  with  a few  operas  and  oratorios  (from  1737) ; Giuseppe 
Scarlatti  (d.  1777),  Alessandro’s  grandson,  with  27  operas  (from  1740)  at 
Naples,  Venice  and  Vienna ; Pasquale  Cafaro  (d.  1787),  pupil  and  successor 


THE  NEAPOLITAN  OPERA 


28l 


of  Leo,  with  almost  20  operas  and  oratorios  (from  1745)  ; and  the  two  Span- 
iards Dominico  Terradeglias  (d.  1751),  pupil  of  Durante  and  choirmaster  in 
Rome,  with  13  operas  (from  1736)  in  Italy  and  at  London,  and  Davide 
Perez  (d.  after  1782),  pupil  of  Mancini,  from  1739  choirmaster  at  Palermo  and 
from  1752  at  Lisbon,  with  about  30  operas  (from  1740)  at  various  places, 
of  which  Demetrio  (1752)  and  Solimanno  (175 7)  were  specially  successful  at 
Lisbon. 

It  will  be  observed  that  gradually  the  vogue  of  Neapolitan 
works  spread  far  away  from  Naples.  Leading  composers  were 
beginning  to  travel  more  and  Italians  were  in  request  at  all  mu- 
sical centres  in  Germany  and  at  London.  Chief  among  these 
apostles  of  the  school  was  Jommelli,  who  for  a time  had  great 
renown  from  his  many  works  for  both  theatre  and  church.  He 
brought  an  access  of  emotional  intensity  into  the  style  that  in- 
creased its  dramatic  power,  broke  up  somewhat  the  formal  reg- 
ularity of  its  aria  forms  and  improved  some  technical  details. 
The  German  Hasse  matched  him  in  fertility  and  in  melodious- 
ness, but  fell  below  him  in  vigor  and  brilliance.  In  a distant 
way,  also,  the  far  greater  Handel  belonged  to  this  group,  though 
his  early  style  was  formed  before  he  came  in  contact  with  the 
Neapolitans  and  was  always  too  individual  to  be  treated  with 
theirs. 

Nicola  Jommelli  (d.  1774)  was  born  in  1714  near  Naples,  was  trained  there 
in  the  schools,  especially  under  Durante,  Leo  and  Feo,  and,  besides  some 
slighter  works,  produced  with  success  his  first  operas  (1737-8),  the  earliest, 
E err  ore  amoroso,  under  an  assumed  name.  His  sudden  fame  led  to  extensive 
travels  as  a favorite  opera-writer.  At  Rome  from  1 740  he  was  patronized  by  an 
English  noble,  at  Bologna  in  1741  he  came  under  Martini’s  influence  in  coun- 
terpoint, at  Venice  in  1741  and  later  he  received  honors  from  the  Council  and 
began  notable  writing  for  the  church,  at  Vienna  in  1748  he  was  intimate  with 
Metastasio,  and  in  1749  he  was  again  at  Rome,  for  a time  as  choirmaster  at 
St.  Peter’s,  producing  much  church  music.  From  1754  he  was  court-choir- 
master at  Stuttgart  with  extraordinary  privileges  and  salary,  and  by  his 
abundant  new  works  and  his  accomplished  leadership  made  the  musical 
establishment  famous.  In  1769,  however,  the  court  interest  having  flagged, 
he  returned  to  Naples,  bringing  out  several  further  operas,  but  with  a star- 
tling want  of  success,  due  to  the  change  of  style  that  his  long  German 
residence  had  produced.  This  failure  shattered  his  health.  Among  his 
about  50  dramatic  works  were  Ezio  (1741,  Bologna),  Merope  (1741,  Venice), 
Eumene  (1747,  Naples),  Art user se  (1749,  Rome),  Achille  in  Sciro  (1749, 
Vienna),  Ifigenia  in  Aulide  (1751,  Rome),  Pelope  (1755,  Stuttgart),  Ales- 
sandro (1757),  Demofoonte  (1764)  and  Artnida  (1770,  Naples).  His  style 
was  too  dignified  and  forceful  to  serve  well  in  comic  works,  and  his  best  writ- 
ing depended  on  the  inspiration  of  a good  text.  Quite  as  important  were  his 


282 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


church  works,  written  in  a smooth,  thoughtful  style,  including  some  oratorios, 
as  Isacco  ( 1755),  a Passion  (1749),  many  masses,  motets  and  cantatas,  a famous 
Laudate  pueri  (1746),  a great  Requiem  (1756),  a Miserere  (1774),  etc.  He 
also  left  some  instrumental  works,  of  much  less  value. 

Johann  Adolph  Hasse  (d.  1783)  was  older  than  Jommelli,  but  outlived  him. 
He  was  born  in  1699  near  Hamburg,  where  he  came  under  Reiser’s  influence. 
In  1721  he  produced  his  first  opera,  Antiochus  (German  text),  at  Brunswick. 
In  1722  he  went  to  Italy  for  a ten  years’  sojourn,  receiving  from  the  Neapoli- 
tans his  permanent  style,  partly  from  Alessandro  Scarlatti  himself,  and  writing 
operas  for  both  Naples  (from  1723)  and  Venice.  In  1730  he  married  theprima 
donna  Faustina  Bordoni  (d.  1781),  to  whom  much  of  his  later  success  was  due. 
From  1731  he  was  court-choirmaster  at  Dresden,  enjoying  great  local  honor  and 
having  leave  frequently  to  travel,  as  to  London  in  1735  (to  compete  with  Han- 
del), in  1740  to  Paris,  in  1746  to  Munich,  in  1753  to  Berlin,  besides  many 
trips  to  Italy,  everywhere  in  request  as  a popular  favorite.  In  1748-50  occurred 
a series  of  operatic  contests  with  Porporaat  Dresden.  In  1760,  in  the  siege  by 
the  Prussians,  his  property  was  destroyed,  including  most  of  the  MSS.  for  a 
complete  edition  of  his  works.  From  1764,  the  Saxon  Chapel  being  broken 
up,  he  moved  to  Vienna,  continuing  composition,  and  from  1773  lived  in 
Venice,  where  he  died.  At  Dresden  he  was  often  visited  by  Bach,  at  Vienna  he 
came  into  rivalry  with  Gluck,  and  at  Milan  along  with  his  last  opera,  Ruggiero 
(1771),  was  given  a serenata  by  the  boy  Mozart.  His  fertility  was  enormous, 
touching  almost  all  branches  of  composition,  though  slight  in  contrapuntal 
forms.  He  essayed  every  variety  of  Catholic  church  music,  and  was  prolific  in  so- 
natas and  concertos  for  harpsichord,  small  orchestra  or  solo  instruments  — 
most  of  these  without  distinction,  though  always  fluent  and  graceful.  His 
dramatic  works  included  some  10  oratorios  and  about  70  operas.  He  set 
about  25  librettos  by  Metastasio,  some  of  them  twice  or  thrice  over.  His 
more  famous  operas  were  Sesostrate  (1726),  Attalo  (1728),  Artaserse  (1730, 
’40),  Arminio  (1731,  ’45),  Alessandro  (1731),  La  clemenza  di  Tito  (1 737, 
’59)  and  the  intermezzo  Piramo  e Thisbe  (1769) . His  style  was  melodious 
and  singable  rather  than  marked  by  dramatic  or  structural  vigor.  Its 
success  was  due  to  its  perfect  adaptation  to  the  taste  of  the  time. 

Ignazio  Fiorillo  (d.  1787),  a pupil  of  Leo  and  Durante,  after  some  years  of 
wandering,  with  operas  at  Venice  and  Milan  from  1736,  was  from  1754  choir- 
master at  Brunswick  and  in  1762-80  at  Cassel.  He  wrote  some  14 
operas  in  a style  resembling  Hasse’s,  besides  church  music.  Another  com- 
poser of  the  same  class  was  Giovanni  Battista  Lampugnani  (d.  c.  1790),  a 
Milanese  who  succeeded  Galuppi  at  London  in  1744  and  lived  at  Milan  from 
1770,  writing  in  all  about  20  operas  (from  1737). 

While  the  Neapolitans  were  thus  developing  the  opera, 
especially  on  its  melodic  side,  the  later  writers  of  the  Venetian 
school  were  not  idle,  though  their  numerous  works  added  little 
to  real  progress. 

Among  the  composers  already  mentioned  (sec.  90)  who  worked  on  into 
the  1 8th  century  were  M.  A.  Ziani  (d.  1715),  Perti  (d.  1756,  no  operas  after 


THE  OPERA  AT  VENICE  AND  VIENNA  283 

1717),  Lotti  (d.  1740,  no  operas  after  about  1720),  C.  F.  Polaroli  (d.  1722), 
Ariosti  (d.  c.  1740)  and  Caldara  (d.  1736). 

Besides  these  the  following  should  be  mentioned : — 

Giovanni  Battista  Bononcini  (d.  c.  1750),  the  ablest  of  the  three  composers 
of  the  family,  lived  a long  and  checkered  life,  of  which  the  details  are  in  part 
obscure.  Born  about  1660  at  Modena,  trained  at  Bologna,  where  in  1688  he 
was  choirmaster,  and  connected  with  the  court  music  at  Vienna  in  1691-171 1, 
he  was  also  at  Rome,  Berlin  and  other  cities  before  1716,  when  he  was  called 
to  London  first  as  Handel’s  operatic  colleague,  later  as  his  bitter  rival.  In 
1731,  being  convicted  of  plagiarizing  from  Lotti,  he  left  London,  moved  from 
place  to  place,  and  was  last  heard  of  at  Vienna  and  Venice.  He  was  a clever 
writer  along  conventional  lines,  with  some  gifts  as  a melodist.  His  works  in- 
clude over  30  operas,  of  which  the  series  in  London  are  the  best,  from 
Astarto  (1720)  to  Astia7iatte  (1727),  several  oratorios  (as  Ezechia , 1737), 
some  church  music,  cantatas  and  many  instrumental  pieces. 

Francesco  Gasparini  (d.  1727),  pupil  of  Corelli  and  Pasquini  at  Rome,  from 
about  1700  chorusmaster  at  one  of  the  Venetian  conservatories,  wrote  about 
50  operas  (from  1694).  Luc’ Antonio  Predieri  (d.  1769),  a leader  in  the  Ac- 
cademia  filarmonica  at  Bologna  and  probably  choirmaster  at  the  cathedral, 
from  1739  assistant  choirmaster  at  Vienna  and  from  1747  chief,  and  from  1751 
at  Naples  on  a pension,  produced  14  operas  (from  171 1),  largely  for  Ital- 
ian theatres.  Among  the  Venetians  were  Giovanni  Porta  (d.  1755),  at  first 
a teacher  at  Venice,  from  1720  in  London,  and  from  1738  choirmaster  at 
Munich,  with  about  30  operas  (as  Numitore , 1720,  London) ; Giovanni 
Battista  Pescetti  (d.  1766),  pupil  of  Lotti,  active  in  London  in  1737-40,  but 
principally  associated  with  Venice,  finally  as  organist  at  St.  Mark’s,  with 
about  10  (from  1726);  and  Fortunato  Chelleri  (d.  1757),  brought  up  at 
Piacenza,  where  his  first  opera  was  produced  (1707),  followed  by  about 
15  more  (till  1722)  at  various  Italian  cities  and  in  Spain,  and  from  1725 
court-choirmaster  at  Cassel. 

At  Vienna  were  also  notable  the  contrapuntist  Fux  (d.  1741),  with  nearly  30 
dramatic  works  (from  1702),  the  strongest  being  oratorios  ; Francesco  Conti 
(d.  1732),  from  1713  court-composer,  with  even  more  (from  1706);  Josef 
Bonno  (d.  1788),  court-composer  from  1739,  with  about  20  (from  1732)  ; and 
G.  C.  Wagenseil  (d.  1 777),  the  clavier- virtuoso,  in  the  imperial  service  from 

1739,  with  perhaps  10  (from  1740).  (See  secs.  121,  140.) 

At  Munich  were  Pietro  Torri  (d.  1737),  from  1689  court-organist  and  the 
successor  of  Bernabei  as  choirmaster,  with  about  25  operas  (from  1690);  and 
Andrea  Bernasconi  (d.  1784),  born  at  Marseilles  and  educated  at  Parma,  but 
first  known  as  an  opera-writer  at  Vienna  (1738)  and  Venice  (1741),  from 
1753  at  Munich  and  in  1755  Porta’s  successor,  with  about  20  operas,  chiefly 
for  Munich,  besides  considerable  church  music. 

With  Breslau  are  associated  Antonio  Bioni  (d.  after  1739),  pupil  of  Porta, 
opera-director  from  1726,  with  about  25  operas  (from  1721);  and  Daniel 
Gottlieb  Treu  (d.  1749),  born  at  Stuttgart,  pupil  of  Vivaldi  at  Venice,  choir- 
master at  Breslau  from  1725,  at  Prague  from  1727,  and  at  Hirschberg  from 

1740,  with  about  15  operas,  besides  other  works. 


284 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


126.  The  Opera  Buff  a.  — Soon  after  1730  the  many  experi- 
ments with  the  comic  opera,  which  had  been  going  on  from  the 
opening  of  the  century,  attained  signal  importance.  Comic 
pieces  had  long  been  used  as  intermezzi,  slipped  in  for  sheer 
diversion  between  the  acts  of  the  opera  seria.  Often  two  ut- 
terly disconnected  works  were  thus  united  at  a single  perform- 
ance, an  opera  seria  in  three  or  more  acts  interlarded  with  an 
opera  buffa  in  two  or  more  acts  — producing  an  anomalous 
dramatic  mixture.  These  humorous  pieces  had  been  esteemed 
lightly,  but  now  they  began  to  compete  upon  more  equal  terms 
with  the  opera  proper,  especially  because  in  them  the  conven- 
tional restrictions  were  not  applied.  The  number  and  disposition 
of  the  characters  in  the  cast  were  elastic,  the  low  voices,  espe- 
cially basses,  were  favored,  piquant  dialogue  and  acting  were 
essential,  with  vivacious  differentiation  of  the  personages,  con- 
certed numbers  and  climaxes  in  ensemble  were  in  demand  — in 
short,  the  type  came  to  be  as  much  vitalized  by  dramatic  sense 
as  the  serious  opera  was  dominated  by  the  spirit  of  the  concert. 
The  popular  and  artistic  success  of  some  of  these  works  tended 
to  diversify  and  revolutionize  the  prevailing  notion  of  the  opera 
in  general.  Thus,  from  a source  at  first  unrespected,  began  the 
reclamation  of  the  opera  to  its  true  dramatic  mission.  The  im- 
pulse was  given  by  certain  Neapolitans,  followed  by  several 
who  belong  rather  to  the  Venetian  group. 

Giovanni  Battista  Pergolesi  (d.  1736,  aged  26),  born  at  Naples,  after  study 
with  Greco,  Durante  and  Feo,  appeared  from  1731  as  the  composer  of  an 
oratorio,  2 operas,  2 intermezzi,  some  string-trios  and  a grand  mass  for 
10  voices.  Besides  writing  much  church  music,  in  1733  he  scored  an  epoch- 
making  triumph  with  the  comedy  La  serva  padrona,  though  it  was  drafted 
with  but  two  characters  in  the  cast  and  a simple  string-accompaniment.  No 
others  of  his  14  operatic  works,  about  half  of  them  comedies,  were  notably 
successful  during  his  brief  life,  because  of  the  delicacy  of  their  workmanship, 
but  were  later  revived  to  some  extent.  But  his  exquisite  sense  of  characteri- 
zation and  his  novel  evolution  of  melody  from  simple  harmonies  did  much  to 
indicate  dramatic  possibilities.  His  career  was  cut  short  by  consumption 
while  he  was  working  on  his  Stabat  Mater.  He  left  some  important  trio- 
sonatas. 

Egidio  Romoaldo  Duni  (d.  1775),  a pupil  of  Durante,  competed  successfully 
with  Pergolesi  at  Rome  with  his  Nerone  (1735),  traveled  widely  as  an  opera- 
writer,  and  finally  (from  1755)  took  up  the  French  operetta,  first  at  Parma 
and  then  at  Paris,  with  such  clever  adaptation  to  popular  taste  that  he  is  often 
called  the  founder  of  the  op^ra  bouflfe.  He  wrote  over  30  works. 


THE  OPERA  BUFFA 


285 


Nicola  Logroscino  (d.  1763)  was  also  one  of  Durante’s  pupils,  but  nothing 
is  known  of  him  until  1738,  when  the  series  of  his  over  20  operas,  all  comedies 
except  one  (1750),  began.  In  1747  he  went  to  Palermo  as  a teacher  of  coun- 
terpoint, but  later  returned.  His  special  contribution  to  the  advancing  opera 
buffa  was  the  climacteric  ensemble  at  the  close  of  the  acts,  which  was  later 
introduced  into  serious  opera.  Among  his  best  works  were  II  Governatore 
(1747)  and  II  vecchio  inarito.  He  preferred  subjects  that  were  farcically 
humorous,  and  wrote  almost  exclusively  in  the  Neapolitan  dialect.  His  works 
retained  their  vogue  till  displaced  by  those  of  Piccinni. 

Giovanni  Alberto  Ristori  (d.  1753),  born  at  Bologna,  made  his  entire 
career  outside  of  Italy,  being  engaged  from  1715  at  Dresden.  He  was  an 
accomplished  player  on  the  organ  and  harpsichord,  besides  writing  freely  in 
secular  and  sacred  forms.  Among  his  1 5 or  more  dramatic  works,  the  comic 
operas  Calandro  (1716)  and  Don  Chiscotte  (1727)  are  notable. 

Baldassare  Galuppi  (d.  1785),  born  near  Venice,  was  from  1722  a pupil  of 
Lotti  and  the  organist  of  various  churches.  He  was  also  a clavier-virtuoso. 
His  first  opera  (1722,  Vicenza)  failed,  but  showed  his  gifts  as  a buffo  writer. 
In  1729,  however,  Dorinda  made  a hit  at  Venice,  and  further  works  were  ex- 
tremely popular.  From  1741  he  was  in  London,  where  airs  from  his  works 
were  in  demand.  Except  for  two  sojourns  in  Russia  (1743-8, 1765-8),  the  rest  of 
his  life  was  spent  at  Venice,  where  from  1748  he  was  second  choirmaster  at  St. 
Mark’s  and  in  1762-5  chief.  His  115  operas  had  a great  vogue.  About  one- 
third  of  them  were  comic  (mostly  after  1750),  and  their  verve  and  jollity  won 
for  him  the  name  of  6 the  father  of  the  opera  buffa.’  He  also  wrote  church 
music  and  some  interesting  instrumental  pieces  (see  sec.  148). 

127.  The  Opera  in  France.  — No  special  progress  took  place 
in  French  opera  during  the  first  third  of  the  century.  The 
works  of  Lully  continued  to  be  regarded  as  typical,  with  some 
additions  by  Destouches  and  especially  Campra.  But  popular 
interest  in  the  serious  opera  was  constantly  hindered  by  the 
craving  for  scenic  divertissements  of  an  ephemeral  sort.  The 
styles  in  vogue  varied  from  the  ‘ ballet  ’ or  dance-spectacle,  with 
its  accent  upon  studied  alternations  of  movements  set  to  brilliant 
orchestral  accompaniments,  or  the  ‘intermede’  and  ‘vaudeville,’ 
which  were  often  analogous  to  the  German  singspiel  or  the  Eng- 
lish ballad-opera,  up  to  the  later  ‘ opera  comique,’  in  which 
genuine  dramatic  interest  was  developed  by  the  essential  humor 
of  the  plot  or  the  text,  often  treated  to  some  extent  through 
spoken  dialogue.  The  glitter  of  costuming  and  staging,  the 
sensuous  charm  of  dancing  evolutions  and  the  catchy  lilt  of 
light  song  were  far  more  prized  than  noble  or  impassioned 
declamation,  sustained  arias,  well-considered  scenes  or  dramatic 
force  and  unity  in  the  whole.  What  gains  there  were  lay  in 
increased  skill  with  accompaniments  and  in  a more  piquant 


286 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


handling  of  the  voices.  It  is  notable  that  many  writers  of 
operas  at  this  period  were  drawn  from  the  ranks  of  the 
orchestra.  The  dominant  composer  after  1735  was  Rameau. 

While  the  serious  opera  had  its  home  under  royal  patronage  at  the 
Acadtmie  (later  the  Grand  Ofera),  several  other  theatres  became  exceed- 
ingly  popular,  like  the  fluctuating  Thedtres  de  la  foire  and  the  more  estab- 
lished Comedie  Franqaise  and  Co?nedie  Italienne  (the  forerunners  of  the 
Opera-  Comiq  ue) . 

Several  of  the  opera-writers  already  named  (see  sec.  85)  produced  works 
after  1700,  notably  Campra  (mostly  before  1718)  and  Destouches  (till  1726). 
To  these  the  following  may  be  added  : — 

Jean  Claude  Gillier  (d.  1737),  a violinist  at  the  Comedie  Fran9aise,  brought 
out  perhaps  20  operettas  (from  1696),  of  which  Les  dieux  de  la  foire  (1724) 
and  Sancho  Panqa  (1727)  are  examples.  They  did  much  to  fix  the  taste  of 
the  Parisian  public  for  the  light  style. 

Baptistin  Stuck  (d.  1755),  born  at  Florence  of  German  parents,  was  long 
employed  as  ’cellist  by  the  court  and  at  the  Opera,  being  a pioneer  on  his 
instrument  in  the  operatic  orchestra.  He  wrote  some  20  operettas,  ballets  and 
operas  (from  1709),  notably  Meleagre  (1709),  Manto  la  fee  (1 71 1)  and  Poly- 
dor  e (1720),  with  many  solo  cantatas  (from  1706). 

Other  temporarily  popular  composers  in  the  light  vein  were  Joseph  Mouret 
(d.  1738,  insane),  from  1707  in  the  service  of  the  Duchess  of  Maine,  later  con- 
ductor of  the  Concerts  spirituels  and  composer  to  the  Comedie  Italienne  (works 
from  1 7 1 1 ) ; Jean  Baptiste  Maurice  Quinault  (d.  1744),  in  1712-33  an  actor 
and  stage-singer  at  the  Comedie  Fran9aise  (many  works,  one  produced  at  the 
Opdra,  1728)  ; Colin  de  Blamont  (d.  1760),  superintendent  of  music  at  Ver- 
sailles from  1719,  with  over  15  ballets  (from  1721),  solo  cantatas  and  some 
chamber  suites;  and  several  instrumentalists,  like  Jacques  Aubert  (d.  1753), 
with  several  ballets,  etc.  (from  1713),  and  Michel  Pignolet  de  Monteclair 
(d.  1737),  the  pioneer  double-bassist. 

Frangois  Francceur  (d.  1787)  and  Frangois  Rebel  (d.  1775),  both  first 
appearing  as  boy-violinists  at  the  Opera  in  1710  and  1714  respectively,  were 
life-long  friends  and  collaborateurs  in  a series  of  court  offices,  including  the 
supervision  of  the  Opdra  from  1 736,  and  produced  jointly  10  operas  (from 
1726),  such  as  Pyrame  et  Thisbe  (1726)  and  Tar  sis  et  Julie  (1728),  which 
were  the  vogue  for  a time.  Francceur  also  wrote  some  violin-sonatas. 

Jean  Philippe  Rameau  (d.  1764),  born  at  Dijon  in  1683,  was  a precocious 
clavier-player,  attracting  attention  when  but  7 years  old.  After  a good  gen- 
eral education  and  becoming  noted  as  an  organist,  at  18  he  was  sent  to  Italy, 
but  was  uninterested  in  Italian  music.  After  visiting  Paris  in  1705  and  touring 
in  southern  France  as  a violinist  in  an  opera-troupe,  in  1717  he  went  to  Paris, 
where  he  studied  with  Marchand,  but  soon  incurred  his  jealousy.  For  a time 
he  was  organist  at  Lille  and  Clermont,  devoting  himself  to  theoretical  study 
and  the  writing  of  church  works  and  clavier-pieces.  Returning  to  Paris  in 
1721,  he  steadily  advanced  in  reputation,  though  his  views  on  harmony 
were  too  novel  to  be  readily  accepted,  and  became  recognized  as  the  foremost 


RAMEAU  AND  THE  FRENCH  OPERA 


287 


French  organist.  Under  wealthy  patronage  he  first  attempted  a Biblical 
opera  (libretto  by  Voltaire),  which  was  not  accepted  at  the  Opera,  and  his 
Hippolyte  et  Aricie  (1733),  though  undeniably  powerful,  so  far  failed  that  he 
almost  gave  up  dramatic  writing.  From  1735  till  1760,  however,  he  wrote 
opera  after  opera  with  increasing  success,  Castor  et  Pollux  (1 737),  Dardanus 
(r 739)  and  Zoroastre  (1749)  being  the  largest,  with  nearly  20  others  of  the 
ballet-opera  type,  of  which  Les  Indes  galantes  (1735)  was  the  most  popular. 
Gradually  his  prestige  displaced  that  of  Lully,  though  their  styles  were  not 
radically  different.  Both  used  much  declamatory  recitative,  many  dance-num- 
bers, the  tripartite  overture,  many  arias  with  more  decoration  than  organic 
strength,  etc.  Lully  had  the  keener  dramatic  sense,  but  Rameau  was  musically 
more  gifted.  He  also  made  a freer  use  of  the  chorus.  He  was  beset  by 
continual  controversy  and  intrigue,  but  his  industry  and  vigor  were  unflagging. 
(For  his  other  works,  see  secs.  138, 141.) 

Other  names  are  Jean  Joseph  Cassanea  de  Mondonville  (d.  1772),  a violinist 
from  1737,  leader  at  the  Concerts  spirituels  and  from  1755  conductor,  in  the 
royal  band  and  from  1745  at  its  head,  with  9 light  operas,  3 oratorios  and 
some  motets  (from  1742)  ; Jean  Jacques  Rousseau  (d.  1778),  the  philosopher 
and  theorist  (see  sec.  141 ) , of  whose  few  dramatic  works  (from  1745)  Le 
devin  du  village  (1752)  achieved  a signal  success,  while  his  later  Pygmalion 
(1770)  became  the  prototype  of  the  melodrama,  both  being  marked  by  me- 
lodic beauty;  Antoine  Dauvergne  (d.  179 7),  a violinist  at  the  court  and  the 
Opera  from  about  1740  and  Mondonville’s  successor  at  the  Concerts  spiri- 
tuels in  1762,  with  15  works  (from  1752),  chief  of  which  were  Les  troqueurs 
( 1 753)?  usually  called  the  first  opera  comique  (with  spoken  dialogue),  Enee  et 
Lavinie  (1758),  etc. ; and  the  Italian  Duni  (d.  1775),  who  arrived  in  1755  and 
exerted  a strong  influence  on  the  opera  boufife  in  general  (see  sec.  126). 

In  1752  broke  out  the  curious  strife  between  Italian  and  French  par- 
tisans, known  as  the  1 Guerre  des  buffons,’  which  was  occasioned  by  the 
advent  of  an  Italian  troupe  with  their  own  repertory  of  works  and  with 
singers  trained  in  the  fine  art  of  vocalization.  Their  side  was  cham- 
pioned by  the  critics  Grimm,  Diderot  and  Rousseau,  and  the  court,  the 
press  and  the  public  for  two  years  or  more  were  sharply  divided  into  two 
parties^  between  which  the  literary  and  social  antagonism  was  intense 
(expressed,  for  instance,  in  some  60  pamphlets).  The  Italians  ranged 
themselves  under  the  name  of  the  queen,  the  French  under  that  of  the 
king,  and  each  sought  by  every  means  to  discredit  the  other.  The 
French  party  ultimately  triumphed  and  the  historic  opera  comique  fol- 
lowed. In  this  contest  a prominent  figure  was  Jean  Georges  Noverre  (d. 
1810),  known  throughout  Europe  as  a dancer,  who  strengthened  the 
dramatic  quality  of  the  ballet  and  wrote  a noted  book  on  dancing  (1760). 

128.  The  Opera  in  Germany.  — It  seems  as  if  Hamburg  should 
have  led  in  significant  operatic  progress  in  northern  Europe, 
since  there  were  brought  together  the  singspiel,  the  Italian 
opera  and  certain  French  ideas  as  to  instrumental  music.  It  is 
true  that  in  some  cases  German  opera-writers  showed  dra- 


288 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


matic  force,  vigorous  harmonic  structure,  based  on  sound  con- 
trapuntal experience,  and  a virile  use  of  the  orchestra,  but  as  a 
rule  they  surrendered  themselves  to  a facile  copying  of  Italian 
melodious  conventionality.  In  details  the  German  style  differed 
somewhat  from  the  Italian,  but  in  general  spirit  and  method  it 
tended  to  treat  composition  as  a stereotyped  trick  which  could 
be  learned  by  any  one  once  for  all.  Hence  became  common  a 
lifeless,  but  outwardly  correct,  style  which  is  often  called  that 
of  the  ‘ zopf  ’ or  ‘ perruque  ’ — an  official,  perfunctory,  mechani- 
cal style.  This  was  not  wholly  bad  or  useless,  since  it  favored  the 
wide  extension  of  many  sorts  of  works  in  many  places,  but  in 
historical  perspective  it  seems  tame  and  flat.  Much  that  has 
already  been  noted  really  belongs  to  this  monotonous  class. 
Unfortunately,  the  tendency  of  the  Hamburg  circle  was  mainly 
toward  making  it  universal  in  Germany.  It  was  from  this  that 
Bach  turned  in  discouragement,  from  which  Handel  vigorously 
broke  away,  and  against  which  at  length  came  a revolt  in  the 
second  half  of  the  century.  Until  that  time  there  was  little 
German  opera  of  distinctive  quality. 

Brief  reference,  however,  is  due  certain  composers  of  renown,  if  not  all  of 
much  originality : — 

Both  Mattheson  (d.  1764)  and  Telemann  (d.  1767),  already  named  as  indus- 
trious church  writers  (sec.  120),  wrote  operas  from  about  1700,  the  former 
sparingly  and  with  angularity,  the  latter  freely  and  superficially.  Of  Matthe- 
son’s  8,  the  chief  were  Cleopatra  (1704)  and  Henrico  IV.  (1711),  and  of  Tele- 
mann’s 40  or  more,  Damon  (1724),  Flavius  Bertaridus  (1729)  and  Genserich 
(1732).  Telemann  also  wrote  at  least  600  overtures!  His  wide  popularity 
led  many  lesser  writers  to  imitate  his  style. 

The  relation  of  Keiser  (d.  1739)  to  the  Hamburg  opera,  his  fertility  and  his 
power  have  already  been  noted  (secs.  87,  120).  From  him  the  youthful 
Handel  received  in  1703-6  an  impulse  to  dramatic  work  that  bore  immediate 
fruit  (see  sec.  129).  In  a limited  sense,  therefore,  Handel  belongs  to  the 
Hamburg  group,  though  he  had  no  later  connection  with  it  except  as  he  gave 
one  of  his  Passions  there  in  1716. 

Christoph  Graupner  (d.  1760),  almost  exactly  contemporary  with  Handel, 
had  a similar  connection  with  Hamburg.  After  training  under  Schelle  and 
Kuhnau  at  Leipsic,  in  1706-9  he  was  in  Reiser’s  orchestra  as  cembalist,  and 
then  went  to  Darmstadt,  where  in  1712  he  succeeded  Briegel  as  choirmaster. 
In  1722  he  was  one  of  the  aspirants  for  the  cantorate  of  the  Thomasschule  at 
Leipsic,  and  would  have  been  appointed  before  Bach  came  into  the  competi- 
tion had  not  his  Darmstadt  patron  objected.  In  1750,  like  Handel,  he  became 
lotally  blind  — the  penalty  of  excessive  application,  partly  to  music-engraving. 
He  was  enormously  prolific,  especially  in  church  music  (1300  pieces  left  in 


THE  OPERA  IN  GERMANY 


289 


MS.  at  Darmstadt),  and  in  works  for  harpsichord  and  orchestra.  Early  in  his 
career  he  also  wrote  about  10  operas  (1 707-1 1,  ’19),  mostly  at  Hamburg.  His 
genius  was  much  admired  and  was  certainly  above  the  average. 

Gottfried  Heinrich  Stolzel  (d.  1749),  the  eminent  church  composer  (see  sec. 
120),  produced  over  20  operas  (1711-23)  at  Breslau,  Naumburg,  Prague,  Bay- 
reuth and  Gotha,  among  which  Valeria  (1712)  was  specially  popular.  He 
united  learning  with  a gift  of  tunefulness,  which  he  cultivated  by  travel  in 
Italy. 

Karl  Heinrich  Graun  (d.  1759)  was  the  remaining  prominent  opera-writer  of 
the  time,  though,  like  Stolzel,  not  directly  connected  with  Hamburg  (see  sec. 
120).  His  operas  numbered  over  30  (from  1726),  chiefly  for  Berlin,  where  he 
was  director  under  Frederick  the  Great,  whose  taste  was  imperious  for  French 
and  Italian  styles,  and  who  himself  edited  many  librettos  and  often  contributed 
some  numbers.  Popular  examples  after  the  erection  of  the  new  opera-house 
in  1742  were  Artaserse  (1743),  Catone  in  Utica  (1744),  Adriano  in  Siria 
(1745),  Deinofoonte  (1746),  etc.  Graun’s  style  resembled  Hasse’s  in  agreeable 
melody  and  clever  workmanship. 

129.  Handel. — The  historic  position  of  Handel  is  peculiar.  To 
a certain  degree  he  appears,  like  Bach,  as  a natural  consummation 
of  movements  that  had  been  long  in  progress  in  Italy  and  Ger- 
many, since  he  stands  out  as  the  most  powerful  opera-writer  in 
the  early  Italian  manner,  and  was  also  an  organ  contrapuntist  in 
the  direct  German  line.  But  the  final  application  of  his  ener- 
getic and  sturdy  genius  to  the  oratorio  was  unprecedented,  and 
the  fact  that  this  took  place  in  England  and  acquired  concen- 
trated influence  there  has  linked  him  closely  with  modern  choral 
music.  Although  he  was  keenly  alive  to  the  dominant  tenden- 
cies of  his  age  and  facile  with  conventional  writing  for  immediate 
popular  success,  he  also  often  broke  through  traditions  with  the 
confident  independence  that  betokens  original  conviction  and 
creative  invention  of  high  order.  The  circumstances  of  his 
career  developed  artistic  characteristics  very  different  from  those 
of  Bach,  setting  him  in  another  category,  artistically  not  so  high, 
but  practically  for  a long  time  more  effective.  His  individual 
works  usually  do  not  bear  such  minute  analysis  as  those  of  Bach, 
but  his  popular  impress  has  been  infinitely  greater  and  in  its 
sphere  thoroughly  healthy  and  noble.  Certainly  he  towers  in 
dignity  above  all  others  of  his  contemporaries  except  Bach. 

Georg  Friedrich  Handel  (d.  1759)  was  born  in  ^85  at  Halle.  [The  family 
name  was  properly  Handel,  later  commonly  anglicized  into  Handel.]  There 
is  no  record  of  musical  ability  among  his  ancestors.  He  was  the  son  of  a re- 
spected surgeon  and  his  second  wife  (28  years  younger),  the  daughter  of  a 
Lutheran  pastor.  His  father  destined  him  for  the  law,  but  the  boy’s  eager- 


u 


290 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


ness  for  music  was  irrepressible,  and  finally,  after  attracting  the  notice  of  one 
of  the  father’s  patrons,  was  met  by  careful  instruction  under  the  organist  Zachau 

(d.  1712).  His  mastery  of  playing 
(clavier,  organ,  violin  and  oboe)  and 
of  strict  composition  was  rapid.  At  1 1 
(1696)  he  was  taken  to  Berlin  as  a 
prodigy.  From  1697,  his  father  having 
died,  his  education  was  guided  by  his 
mother,  a quiet  and  earnest  woman. 
In  1702  he  entered  the  new  University 
of  Halle,  besides  becoming  organist  at 
the  cathedral.  In  these  early  years  he 
is  said  to  have  written  much,  but  few 
traces  of  this  remain.  In  1 703,  in  search 
of  experience,  he  entered  Reiser’s  or- 
chestra at  Hamburg  as  second  violin. 
Soon  he  appeared  as  a composer,  pro- 
ducing 4 operas,  Almira  (1704)  being 
the  first,  besides  winning  applause  as 
an  organist.  Becoming  intimate  with 
Mattheson,  they  went  together  in  1703 
to  Liibeck  to  visit  the  aged  Buxtehude.  In  1704  he  produced  his  first  Passion. 
The  same  year,  after  a quarrel  with  Mattheson,  he  narrowly  escaped  being 
killed  by  the  latter  in  a duel.  After  about  three  years  he  betook  himself  to 
Italy  for  further  operatic  work. 

His  Italian  sojourn  extended  from  1707  to  1710,  with  repeated  stays  at 
Florence,  Venice,  Rome  and  Naples.  Everywhere  he  was  honored  by  musi- 
cians, patrons  and  the  public.  He  wrote  some  notable  church  music,  2 im- 
mensely successful  operas,  Rodrigo  (1707,  Florence)  and  Agrippina  (1708, 
Venice),  and  2 Italian  oratorios.  His  style  became  externally  accommodated 
to  Italian  traditions,  though  without  sacrificing  its  native  freshness  and  force. 
In  1710,  returning  to  Germany  and  introduced  by  Steffani,  he  succeeded  him 
as  choirmaster  to  the  Elector  of  Hanover,  with  leave  for  further  travel.  Pro- 
ceeding at  once  to  London,  he  made  a hit  with  Rinaldo  (1711),  followed  on  a 
second  visit  by  Teseo  (1713)  and  later  by  a few  other  dramatic  works.  In  1713 
he  began  writing  sacred  music  to  English  words,  especially  the  so-called 
Utrecht  Te  Deum  and  Jubilate.  In  1714,  at  the  sudden  death  of  Queen  Anne, 
the  Elector  succeeded  as  George  I.,  and  Handel  was  for  a time  in  disgrace  both 
for  his  long  absence  from  Hanover  and  for  his  part  in  the  Utrecht  celebration, 
which  the  new  king  disapproved.  In  1715,  however,  regaining  favor,  he  was 
assigned  court  salaries  that  continued  till  his  death.  In  1716  he  composed 
his  second  Passion  for  Hamburg.  Till  1719  or  1720  he  was  choirmaster  to 
the  wealthy  Duke  of  Chandos,  producing  a noble  set  of  anthems,  his  first 
English  oratorio  Esther  (1720),  the  serenata  Acis  and  Galatea  (1720)  and 
some  harpsichord-pieces.  His  power  as  a choral  writer  was  already  clearly 
visible. 

In  1720  an  aristocratic  stock -company,  The  Royal  Academy  of  Music,  was 
formed  to  give  operas,  with  Handel  and  G.  B.  Bononcini  as  directors,  and  a 


HANDEL 


291 


powerful  troupe.  For  this  Handel  wrote  14  operas,  including  Radamisto 
(1720),  Muzio  Scevola  (1721,  3d  act  only,  the  others  being  by  Bononcini  and 
Mattei),  Ottone  (1722),  Tamer lano  (1724),  Rodelmda  (1725),  Scipione  (1726), 
Alessandro  (1726),  etc.  From  1721  the  bitter  rivalry  between  him  and  Bo- 
noncini was  taken  up  by  numerous  partisans,  became  entangled  with  the  politi- 
cal antipathy  between  Whigs  and  Tories,  was  inflamed  by  intrigues  and 
competitions  between  leading  singers,  especially  Senesino  and  the  prime 
donne  Cuzzoni  and  Bordoni  (later  Hasse’s  wife),  finally  led  to  disgraceful 
riots  in  the  theatre,  and  in  1728  ruined  the  enterprise.  Handel’s  self-respect 
then  impelled  him  to  organize  a company  of  his  own,  for  which  he  wrote  13 
more  operas,  including  Lotario  (1729),  Poro  (1731),  Ezio  (1732),  Arianna 
( 1 733)?  and  several  pasticcios  and  hasty  works.  The  hostility  of  Bononcini, 
backed  by  the  prominent  Marlboroughs,  led  in  1733  to  the  formation  of  a 
rival  company,  to  which  Senesino  deserted,  and  in  which,  after  Bononcini’s 
disgrace,  Porpora,  Hasse  and  other  famous  opera-writers  cooperated.  In 
1 737  the  two  enterprises  ruined  each  other,  Handel  losing  all  his  savings  and 
suffering  a partial  stroke  of  paralysis.  In  his  efforts  to  hold  his  public  he  had 
revived  Esther  with  dramatic  action,  also  Acts  and  Galatea , had  produced  the 
oratorios  Deborah  and  Athaliah  (both  1 733),  and  had  also  written  fine  court 
anthems  and  considerable  instrumental  music. 

He  was  now  53  years  old.  From  this  time  he  practically  gave  up  operatic 
music,  turning  with  a sure  instinct  to  oratorios.  He  now  produced  about  15 
choral  works,  on  which  his  modern  renown  almost  wholly  rests,  including 
Saul  (1739),  Israel  in  Egypt  (1739),  serenata  E Allegro,  etc.  (1740),  The 
Messiah  (1742),  Samson  (1743),  Judas  Maccabceus  (1747),  Joshua  (1748), 
Solomon  (1749),  Theodora  (1750)  and  Jephtha  (1752)  — The  Messiah  being 
produced  on  a concert-tour  to  Dublin.  These  works  vary  in  method,  the  ma- 
jority being  modeled  in  dramatic  form,  while  Israel  in  Egypt  is  unique  for 
its  gigantic  series  of  pictorial  1 plague  1 choruses,  and  The  Messiah , following 
its  masterly  libretto  (by  Charles  Jennens),  is  almost  wholly  contemplative 
and  devotional.  In  them  all  the  choral  numbers  are  lifted  to  a chief  place 
and  developed  with  extraordinary  variety  and  vigor,  thus  constituting  a musi- 
cal type  of  great  importance.  The  appeal  of  these  works  to  English  re- 
ligious feeling  and  their  eminent  intrinsic  value  secured  for  them  not  only 
immediate  popularity,  but  an  enduring  influence  upon  subsequent  English 
composers.  Their  recognition  by  Continental  critics  was  slow,  however,  so 
that  their  general  influence  came  much  later.  In  his  later  years  Handel’s 
enemies  disappeared  and  his  powers  as  composer,  conductor  and  organist 
were  universally  acknowledged.  In  1753  he  became  almost  totally  blind,  but 
continued  active  till  within  ten  days  of  his  death.  He  was  buried  in  West- 
minster Abbey  with  notable  public  honor. 

Personally,  Handel  was  bluff  and  hearty,  much  inclined  to  society  and  with 
keen  insight  into  character.  He  was  blunt,  outspoken,  sometimes  caustic,  yet 
generous  and  strictly  honorable.  His  handling  of  singers  and  players  was 
imperious,  but  often  shrewd  and  clever.  As  life  progressed,  his  inborn  Ger- 
man seriousness  became  more  apparent,  and  it  is  clear  that  his  religious  works 
were  expressions  of  earnest  conviction  and  feeling.  He  was  an  indefatigable 
worker  and  in  composition  exceedingly  rapid,  since  his  command  of  resources 


292 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


was  absolute  and  his  flow  of  invention  unlimited.  He  accumulated  a con- 
siderable fortune,  and  was  never  married.  From  1726  he  was  a naturalized 
British  subject. 

130.  His  Style  and  Significance.  — Since  Handel  lived  through 
the  whole  first  half  of  the  century,  he  was  contemporary  with  all 
the  masters  who  have  been  considered.  Yet  his  contact  with 
most  of  them  was  casual  or  altogether  lacking.  His  youth  was 
spent  in  the  atmosphere  of  German  church  music  and  the  Ham- 
burg opera.  In  Italy  for  a time  he  was  intimate  with  musicians 
at  Venice,  Rome  and  Naples.  Later  he  made  several  hurried 
trips  to  the  Continent  in  search  of  singers.  Many  good  per- 
formers worked  under  him  in  London,  and  a few  composers 
competed  with  him.  Up  to  the  middle  of  his  career  he  was 
probably  cognizant  of  the  chief  tendencies  of  the  operatic  world. 

The  closest  personal  influences  upon  Handel  in  Germany  came  from 
Zachau,  his  first  teacher,  from  the  Hamburg  triumvirate,  Keiser,  Matthe- 
sonand  Telemann,  though  only  the  first  was  old  enough  to  be  significant, 
and  from  Steffani,  who  was  a close  friend  for  years.  In  Italy  he  certainly 
met  Lotti,  Corelli  and  the  two  Scarlattis,  competing  with  Domenico  on 
the  harpsichord  and  organ.  The  Neapolitan  school  was  then  only  just 
taking  shape.  In  England  he  must  have  encountered  the  memory  of 
Purcell’s  career,  which  had  ended  15  years  before  his  arrival.  Just  prior 
to  his  coming  a few  Italian  operas  had  been  given  in  London  (M.  A. 
Bononcini’s  Camilla  in  1706  and  Almahide  in  1710,  Scarlatti’s  Pirro  e 
Demetrio  in  1708,  Mancini’s  Idaspe  in  1710,  G.  B.  Bononcini’s  Etearco  in 
1 7 1 1 ),  besides  several  nondescript  pasticcios.  At  intervals  afterward 
various  Italian  composers  were  represented  at  London,  usually  in  rivalry 
to  Handel,  as  Dom.  Scarlatti  ( Narcisso , 1719),  Porta  ( Nuniitore , 1720), 
G.  B.  Bononcini  (seven  works,  1720-7),  Ariosti  (seven,  1723-7),  Porpora 
(four  or  more,  1 733—5,  ’42),  Hasse  (a  few  from  1734),  Galuppi  (1741-3), 
Lampugnani  (1743-5),  Gluck  (1746)  and  Terradeglias  (1746-7).  The 
predominating  school  in  vogue  was  certainly  the  Neapolitan. 

Granting  whatever  may  be  necessary  for  the  bent  given  him 
at  Hamburg  and  in  Italy  and  for  the  influence  of  his  later  condi- 
tions, his  development  was  mainly  an  independent  one,  guided 
by  his  own  desires  and  the  possibilities  of  his  public.  He  was 
fortunate  in  choosing  to  work  in  England,  where  traditions  were 
unformed.  This  made  it  possible  to  deal  freely  with  all  forms 
and  to  devise  new  ones.  Hence  he  was  able  to  be  the  founder 
of  a special  English  tradition  which  still  continues.  But  his  com- 
parative isolation  kept  his  works  from  being  widely  known  else- 
where and  delayed  the  full  recognition  of  his  genius. 


HANDEL 


293 


Handel  was  first  of  all  a dramatic  musician,  his  ambition 
centring  upon  the  opera.  Under  this  impulse  he  took  such 
forms  as  his  age  provided,  such  librettos  as  he  could  get,  and 
then  put  his  music  together  as  he  thought  dramatic  effectiveness 
required.  His  originality  was  shown  more  in  the  essential  truth, 
beauty  and  energy  of  particular  numbers  than  in  any  remodeling 
of  accepted  methods.  His  resources  of  melody  were  unrestricted, 
evolved  out  of  a complex,  nervous  harmony,  rather  than  from  a 
simple  chord-scheme,  as  in  later  writers.  He  much  excelled  his 
contemporaries  in  characterization,  embodying  in  phrase,  move- 
ment and  figure  the  general  quality  and  the  personal  reactions 
of  a dramatic  situation.  And  his  instinct  for  arrangement  was 
unerring,  so  that  effective  contrasts  and  climaxes  were  never 
wanting.  His  operas  are  no  longer  known  because  based  on 
poor  librettos  and  written  in  an  obsolete  musical  and  dramatic 
dialect,  but,  measured  by  the  standards  of  their  own  time,  they 
were  masterly. 

The  full  list  of  his  operas  (1704-41)  includes  over  40  full  operas,  over 
10  pasticcios,  and  several  serenatas.  The  subjects  are  almost  all  from 
classical  mythology  or  history,  with  some  from  mediaeval  romance.  The 
librettos  came  from  various  hands  — 7 each  by  Paolo  Rolli  and  N’iccolo 
Francesco  Haym  (d.  1729),  3 by  Metastasio , 1-2  each  by  10  others,  with 
some  unassigned. 

The  step  from  the  opera  to  the  oratorio  was  a short  one,  since 
Handel’s  notion  of  the  oratorio  was  primarily  dramatic  and  not 
liturgical.  He  transferred  to  it  precisely  the  same  methods,  ex- 
cept in  the  one  feature  of  the  chorus.  He  perceived  that  in  a 
concert-form  the  chorus  was  feasible  as  it  was  not  in  the  theatre, 
and  that  for  the  expression  of  the  profound  and  collective  emo- 
tions of  religion  its  use  on  a grand  scale  was  inevitable.  Here 
he  applied  the  resources  of  his  contrapuntal  skill  with  a lucidity, 
breadth  and  sublimity  seldom  since  surpassed.  This  fusion  of 
the  dramatic  recitative  and  aria  with  the  ecclesiastical  motet, 
being  made  by  one  who  was  at  once  a veteran  popular  musician 
and  a truly  devout  man,  resulted  in  a new  composite  type  for 
the  English  oratorio  that  has  ever  since  persisted.  Although 
much  of  his  success  in  this  field  was  due  to  the  excellence 
of  some  of  his  librettos,  his  masterly  use  of  choral  means  — 
not  so  original  or  learned  as  Bach’s,  but  far  more  immediately 
effective  — gives  his  works  of  this  class  a commanding  interest. 


294 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


His  oratorios,  including  a few  early  works,  number  about  20,  and  to 
these  may  well  be  added  one  or  two  of  the  serenatas  (especially  V Allegro, 
in  spite  of  its  jocularity  in  part)  and  a few  of  the  larger  church  works.  His 
principal  librettists  were  Chas.  Jennens  and  Thos.  Morell , but  the  pith  of 
two  works  ( Samson  and  L Allegro)  came  from  Milton,  and  other  poets, 
like  Dryden,  Pope  and  Gay,  were  represented.  The  substance  of  most  of 
the  works  was,  of  course,  Biblical. 

It  would  be  quite  impossible  to  mention  all  the  noted  singers  to  whom 
much  of  Handel’s  popular  success  was  due,  but  a brief  enumeration  of  some 
may  be  of  interest.  In  addition  to  the  two  mezzo-sopranos,  Francesca  Cuzzoni 
(d.  1770),  in  London  in  1722-8  and  1734,  and  Faustina  Bordoni  (d.  1781),  in 
London  in  1726-8,  whose  rivalry  lasted  about  20  years,  the  most  famous  male 
sopranists  were  Antonio  Bernacchi  (d.  1756),  in  London  in  1716-7  and  1729- 
30,  later  a great  teacher  at  Bologna,  Senesino  [Francesco  Bernardi]  (d.  c.  1750), 
in  London  in  1720-7  and  1730-5,  finally  engaged  against  Handel,  Giovanni 
Carestini  (d.  1760),  in  London  in  1733-5,  Gioacchino  Conti  (d.  1761),  in  Lon- 
don in  1736,  and  (in  the  hostile  company)  two  pupils  of  Porpora,  Farinelli 
[Carlo  Broschi]  (d.  1782),  in  London  in  1734-6,  later  in  court  service  at 
Madrid,  and  Caffarelli  [Gaetano  Marjorano]  (d.  1783),  in  London  in  1738. 
These  last  were  life-long  rivals  for  the  highest  place  in  the  operatic  world. 

These  are  but  examples  of  the  many  singers  of  the  age  whose  dexterity  as 
vocalists  and  interpreters  made  them  long  renowned. 

It  remains  to  refer  to  Handel’s  services  to  instrumental  music. 
He  was  a superior  organist,  and  to  most  of  his  oratorio  perform- 
ances contributed  what  were  called  ‘ concertos,’  partly  probably 
extemporaneous,  partly  later  published.  These  works  are  dis- 
tinctly concertistic,  rather  than  churchly,  and  they  stand  detached 
from  the  German  school,  to  which  they  technically  belong,  in 
their  disregard  of  chorale-material.  He  used  the  orchestra  of 
his  day  with  dramatic  variety  and  power,  in  accompaniments,  in 
many  overtures  and  in  some  incidental  numbers.  Without  dis- 
tinctly advancing  established  forms,  he  brought  into  them  the 
freshness  of  idea,  effectiveness  of  plan  and  vigor  of  treatment 
that  marked  his  vocal  writing.  His  clavier  style  was  much  less 
important,  though  often  interesting. 

In  all,  he  wrote  some  70  overtures,  usually  on  the  French  plan. 
The  orchestra  as  he  found  it  was  much  stronger  in  the  wood-wind  than 
is  now  common,  and  the  harpsichord  or  organ  far  more  indispensable. 
Unfortunately  for  historic  accuracy,  several  of  his  best-known  works  have 
been  greatly  modified  by  later  adapters  (as,  notably,  The  Messiah  by 
Mozart  in  1789). 

A special  word  should  be  added  about  the  charges  of  plagiarism  that 
have  been  made  against  Handel.  It  is  clear  that  he  occasionally 


THE  ENGLISH  BALLAD-OPERA 


295 


adapted  whole  passages  from  other  composers  to  his  own  uses,  just  as  he 
transferred  sections  from  one  to  another  of  his  original  works.  But  it 
was  an  age  in  which  pasticcios  or  medleys  abounded,  strict  creativeness 
being  subordinated  to  concertistic  success.  We  may  doubt  whether 
Handel’s  intent  was  deceptive,  and  surely  there  is  no  doubt  about  his 
capacity  for  origination.  Many  of  the  cases  are  merely  those  of  ‘ borrowed 
subjects,’  which  was  and  is  an  established  artistic  practice. 

131.  The  English  Ballad-Opera.  — Incidentally  connected  with 
the  general  course  of  musical  events,  though  in  itself  insignifi- 
cant, was  the  appearance  in  Handel’s  time  of  a kind  of  English 
singspiel,  called  the  ‘ballad-opera.’  This  was  an  amusing, 
often  satirical,  play  in  which  well-known  popular  songs  or  similar 
numbers  were  strung  together  by  a spoken  dialogue  into  a loosely 
connected  story.  Essentially  it  was  an  inferior  sort  of  comic 
opera,  and  its  popularity  from  1728  interfered  with  the  success 
of  more  serious  music.  Most  of  the  writers  in  this  style,  however, 
contributed  also  to  others. 

In  all,  about  45  ballad-operas  were  produced  in  a little  over  15  years. 
Around  the  mention  of  their  arrangers  may  be  grouped  some  notes  of  other 
dramatic  music  in  Handel’s  period  : — 

John  Christopher  Pepusch  (d.  1752),  born  at  Berlin,  came  from  the  Royal 
Chapel  there  to  London  in  1700  as  cembalist  and  compiler  of  Italian  music  at 
the  Drury  Lane  Theatre.  In  1710  he  founded  a society  for  the  study  of  the 
older  composers,  and  from  1712  preceded  Handel  in  the  service  of  the  Duke 
of  Chandos.  From  1715  he  brought  out  several  masques  and  later  3 
ballad-operas,  of  which  The  Beggar's  Opera  (1728,  words  by  Gay)  was  the 
first  of  the  style.  From  1737  he  was  organist  at  the  Charterhouse.  His 
musicianship  was  excellent,  as  his  Harmony  (1730)  shows,  but  his  invention 
was  slight. 

Johann  Ernst  Galliard  (d.  1749),  another  German,  pupil  of  Steffani  at 
Hanover,  was  teacher  in  the  royal  family  under  Queen  Anne  and  succeeded 
G.  B.  Draghi  as  court-organist.  Besides  some  church  music  and  many  in- 
strumental pieces,  he  produced  the  opera  Calypso  (1712),  from  1717  a number 
of  masques  or  pantomimes  (somewhat  akin  to  the  ballad-operas),  and  left  an 
Italian  opera  in  MS.  In  1742  he  translated  Tosi’s  work  on  Figured  Song. 

Henry  Carey  (d.  1743),  often  called  the  author  of  “God  Save  the  King,”  a 
music-teacher  in  London,  was  from  1715  both  librettist  and  composer  of  many 
successful  ballad-operas  and  similar  works.  He  was  one  of  several  able 
satirists  of  the  bombastic  style  current  in  the  Italian  opera. 

John  Christopher  Smith  (d.  1795),  the  son  of  a German  who  came  to  England 
in  1716  to  be  Handel’s  assistant,  was  Handel’s  pupil,  later  his  organist,  copyist 
and  conductor,  the  legatee  of  his  MSS.,  and  the  author  of  Anecdotes  about 
him  (1799).  From  1732  he  wrote  several  operas  in  Italian  or  English  (as 
The  Tempest , 1756),  and  also  oratorios  (as  Paradise  Lost , 1758),  besides  clavier- 
pieces. 


296 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


Thomas  Augustine  Arne  (d.  1778),  the  most  fertile  of  the  series,  was  born 
in  London  in  1710.  From  1733  he  wrote  numerous  operas,  masques  and 
other  dramatic  works,  of  which  Artaxerxes  (1762)  is  counted  the  best,  though 
the  masque  Comus  (1738),  the  oratorio  Abel  (1743)  and  some  lighter  pieces 
were  very  successful.  In  his  oratorio  Judith  (1761)  women-singers  were  used 
in  the  chorus  for  the  first  time.  He  was  essentially  a song-writer,  but  he 
cultivated  all  styles  up  to  the  Italian  recitative  and  the  florid  aria.  His  set- 
tings of  some  of  Shakespeare’s  songs  are  classic. 

The  English  colonies  in  America,  being  in  constant  com- 
munication with  the  mother-country,  naturally  copied  many 
features  of  its  social  life.  Thus  English  ballad-operas  and 
similar  half-musical  entertainments  began  to  be  given  in  a few 
American  cities  certainly  from  1735,  if  not  earlier,  and  became 
fairly  frequent  after  1750. 

The  first  ballad-opera  drafted  in  America  was  The  Disappointment 
(1767),  the  libretto  (by  Andrew  Barton)  involving  the  use  of  18  popular  airs. 
The  projected  performance  of  this  at  Philadelphia  was  given  up  because  its 
satire  was  too  personal.  By  whom  the  songs  were  to  be  arranged  is  not 
known.  (See  also  sec.  164.) 


CHAPTER  XVII 


INSTRUMENTS  AND  INSTRUMENTALISTS 

132.  Solo  Instruments.  — One  of  the  signs  of  a broadened 
view  regarding  methods  of  musical  procedure  was  the  closer 
attention  to  the  artistic  use  alone  of  various  instruments  that 
before  had  been  chiefly  ancillary  to  vocal  effects.  The  great 
development  of  the  vocal  solo  aroused  an  analogous  develop- 
ment of  the  instrumental  solo,  and  this  tended  more  and  more 
to  bring  out  their  contrasted  possibilities.  In  the  17th  century, 
under  the  opera  regime  in  its  early  stages,  the  voice  had  often 
been  used  as  if  it  were  first  of  all  a marvelous  machine,  capable 
under  training  of  dazzling  feats  of  tonal  legerdemain.  From 
this  extreme  the  18th  century  gradually  reacted  in  favor  of 
something  more  normal,  namely,  the  expression  through  the 
voice  of  intimate,  profound  or  intense  personality.  Thus  the 
more  external  accomplishment  of  the  mere  vocalist  gave  place 
to  the  fine  art  of  the  true  singer,  and  the  noblest  field  of  the 
vocal  solo  began  to  be  fully  perceived.  Meanwhile  the  less 
personal  voice  of  certain  instruments  was  more  carefully 
studied,  and  to  it  was  transferred  much  that  was  possible  for 
the  singing  voice,  with  much,  too,  which  was  quite  unvocal,  but 
suggested  by  the  genius  of  the  instrument  itself.  Thus  the 
instrumental  solo  began  to  advance  as  a distinct  art-form. 

The  solo  instruments  thus  used  were  chiefly  those  of  the  viol 
family,  especially  the  violin,  the  old  gamba  and  the  new  violon- 
cello, but  the  flute  was  also  somewhat  considered,  and  the  oboe, 
with  occasionally  the  trumpet  and  other  wind-instruments. 
Furthermore,  interest  in  the  lute  and  the  theorbo  had  not  yet 
ceased,  especially  as  they  were  capable  of  concerted  effects  of 
moderate  dimensions.  The  stringed  keyboard  instruments, 
finally,  now  stepped  forward  into  decided  prominence  as  in- 
dependent implements,  giving  clear  tokens  of  their  later  immense 
influence.  Hints  of  all  this  had  appeared  before  1700,  but  the 
early  18th  century  rises  much  above  preceding  periods  in  defi- 
nite achievements. 

297 


298 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


Fig.  78. — Bass  and  Tenor  Recorders  or  Fltites 
Douces. 

Fig.  79. — Bass  and  Treble  Recorders,  with  Treble, 
Tenor  and  Bass  Fltites  k Bee  (the  last  double). 

Fig.  80.  — Flutes  and  Piccolo,  the  second  flute 
of  metal,  with  cylindrical  bore. 


Fig.  79. 


Fig.  80. 


SOLO  INSTRUMENTS 


299 


The  perfecting  of  the  violin  took  place  in  the  first  part  of  the  18th 
century  (see  secs,  iio-m).  Violin  composition  of  importance  began 
earlier,  receiving  its  first  strong  direction  from  Corelli  (d.  1713)  ; but  its 
wide  expansion  in  the  hands  of  many  able  composers  and  players  belongs 
to  the  1 8th  century,  establishing  for  the  instrument  the  eminence  among 
all  solo  types  that  still  obtains.  Among  the  technical  advances  in  play- 
ing was  that  from  only  the  first  three  positions  (Corelli)  to  the  seventh, 
with  gains  in  finger-dexterity  and  in  bowing. 

Of  the  older  forms  of  viol,  the  only  one  to  hold  its  place  was  the  1 viola 
da  gamba,’  a large  viol  with  flat  back  and  6-7  strings  (usually  tuned  D G 
cead' — a')-  Its  tone  was  a cross  between  that  of  the  tenor  violin  and 
the  violoncello,  but  weaker  and  tamer  than  either.  Probably  because  of 
its  many  strings  and  its  relative  ease,  it  continued  in  use  long  after  it 
was  really  superseded  by  these  finer  forms.  J.  S.  Bach  (d.  1750)  was 
the  last  of  the  strong  writers  for  it,  and  virtuoso  playing  upon  it  ceased 
before  1790.  In  Italy  it  became  obsolete  much  earlier  than  in  Germany, 
France  and  England.  Gambas  were  often  made  in  several  sizes,  so  as  to 
form  a family  by  themselves. 

The  ‘ violoncello 1 is  properly  a bass  violin,  having  4 strings  tuned 
in  fifths  (c  G d a),  the  lower  two  covered  with  wire,  the  accordatura  being 
an  octave  lower  than  that  of  the  tenor  violin.  It  was  first  made  early 
in  the  17th  century,  but  did  not  become  common  for  nearly  a century, 
since  its  fingering  involved  considerable  stretches  — a difficulty  not  fully 
overcome  till  after  1750.  From  early  in  the  1 8th  century,  however, 
scattered  virtuosi  upon  it  appeared,  and  it  steadily  pushed  its  way  to  the 
front.  Both  Bach  and  Handel  clearly  perceived  its  value. 

Occasionally  for  solo  purposes  a form  called  the  ‘ octave-violin 1 was 
made  intermediate  between  the  tenor  and  the  ’cello,  its  tuning  being  an 
octave  below  the  violin  proper.  Bach’s  1 viola  pomposa  ’ was  a small 
type  of  ’cello  with  5 strings  and  a compass  equal  to  that  of  the  ’cello  and 
the  above  octave-violin  combined. 

The  flute,  though  in  use  everywhere  from  time  immemorial,  did  not 
become  artistically  prominent  till  the  early  18th  century.  From  that 
time  the  German  or  transverse  variety  steadily  superseded  the  older 
recorders,  galoubets,  flageolets  and  other  direct  forms  having  a beak  or 
mouthpiece.  Most  of  the  older  cross-flutes  had  a cylindrical  bore,  but  in 
the  18th  century  it  was  usually  conical;  since  about  1840  the  modern 
flute  has  reverted  to  the  cylindrical  type.  The  number  of  finger-holes 
was  rarely  more  than  8,  chromatics  and  upper  tones  being  secured  by 
cross-fingering  and  increased  force.  The  scale  had  many  inequalities, 
so  that  certain  keys  and  successions  were  difficult.  Every  variety  of  flute 
was  made  in  different  sizes  or  pitches,  forming  a full  family.  Modern 
music  retains  only  the  treble,  which  has  always  been  the  chief  form  for 
solos,  and  the  still  higher  ‘piccolo.’  From  1700  the  sweetness  and 
brilliance  of  the  flute  tone,  with  its  capacity  for  rapid  execution,  were 
more  and  more  appreciated.  Bach  was  specially  successful  with  the 
flute,  and  his  younger  contemporary  Quantz  (d.  1773)  was  indefatigable 
in  developing  its  music,  being  unsurpassed  in  his  voluminous  writing 
for  it. 


300 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


The  oboe  (or  hautboy)  and  the 
bassoon,  likewise,  belong  to  a large 
group  of  double-reed  instruments 
known  from  the  earliest  times.  In 
the  1 6th  and  17th  centuries  various 
kinds  were  common,  such  as  the 
schalmey,  chalumeau  or  shawm, 
the  bombarde  or  pommer,  etc.,  all 
with  a conical  bore,  about  8 finger- 
holes,  and  made  in  sets  or  families 
of  different  sizes.  The  bassoon 
proper  or  fagotto  dates  from  the 
17th  century;  it,  too,  was  made  in 
graded  sets.  The  krummhorn  or 
cromorne  differed  from  these  in 
having  a cylindrical  bore  and  hence 
a lower  pitch.  All  these  were 
gradually  consolidated  in  the  18th 
century  into  a single  family  with 
three  chief  representatives,  the 
oboe  (treble),  the  cor  anglais  or 
English  horn  (tenor),  and  the  bas- 
soon (bass).  The  older  instru- 
ments h'x  /road,  thick  reeds,  and 
gave  a loud  and  rather  coarse  tone, 
but,  as  solo  use  became  greater, 
the  reeds  were  made  more  delicate 
and  the  tone  sweeter  and  more 
refined,  so  that  ultimately  the  oboe 
achieved  artistic  importance,  espe- 
cially regarded  for  its  pungency, 
its  expressiveness  and  its  adapta- 
tion to  pastoral  or  idyllic  themes. 


Fig.  81.  — Serpent — a wood-wind  instru- 
ment allied  to  the  zink  or  wooden  cornet, 
sounded  by  a cup-shaped  mouthpiece.  In 
use  from  the  early  17th  century. 


133.  The  Rise  of  the  Virtuoso.  — Better  instruments  imply 
better  players.  In  the  18th  century  the  instrumental  virtuoso 
or  concert-expert  became  for  the  first  time  conspicuous.  Ex- 
ceptional performers  on  any  instrument  had  always  commanded 
attention  and  often  good  positions  in  courtly  or  private  estab- 
lishments. But  they  could  hardly  become  a fully  distinct  class 
among  musicians  until  several  steps  were  taken  in  the  public 
use  of  the  art.  First  of  these  was  the  full  recognition  by  com- 
posers of  the  value  of  purely  instrumental  writing,  such  as  came 
to  pass  in  the  later  17th  century.  Another  was  the  develop- 
ment of  the  orchestra  as  a special  agency  for  accompaniments, 
as  in  the  progress  of  the  opera.  Still  another  was  the  free  use 


THE  RISE  OF  THE  VIRTUOSO 


301 


of  the  public  concert  as  an  institution  distinct  from  the  church 
service,  the  theatric  opera,  or  the  private  entertainments  of  a 
court  or  a wealthy  patron.  From  early  in  the  18th  century  such 
public  performances,  with  miscellaneous  programs  by  singers 
and  players  specially  secured  for  the  occasion,  became  increas- 
ingly popular,  prefiguring  the  universal  modern  custom. 

Important  early  instances  of  concerts  are  the  1 Abendmusiken’  of  Buxte- 
hude and  his  successors  at  Liibeck  (from  1673  or  earlier)  ; those  of  the 
Tonkiinstlersocietat  of  Vienna  (from  1672)  ; those  by  Reiser  at  Hamburg 
(from  about  1700)  ; those  of  the  Musikverein  of  Leipsic  (from  1743,  follow- 
ing the  lines  of  an  earlier  club  at  the  University),  which  later  (from  1781) 
became  famous  as  the  Gewandhaus  Concerts ; the  ‘ Concerts  spirituels 1 
on  feast-days  at  Paris  under  the  management  of  the  Opera  (from  1725), 
followed  by  several  other  similar  enterprises ; those  of  Banister  at  Lon- 
don (from  about  1675)  and  °f  the  Academy  of  Ancient  Music  (from 
1710),  etc.,  with  the  festivals  of  the  Three  Choirs  in  West  England  (from 
1724)  and  the  oratorio  performances  of  Handel  (from  1739  and  earlier) 
— the  prototypes  of  many  others  throughout  England. 

These  are  simply  conspicuous  instances  of  a public  musical  institution 
previously  unknown,  of  which  every  variety  was  possible  in  many  places 
under  diverse  auspices.  This  new  institution  joined  with  the  opera  to 
make  music  on  a large  scale  a function  of  society  in  a way  the  historic 
significance  of  which  cannot  be  overestimated. 

The  order  in  which  the  various  kinds  of  instrumental  virtuosi 
appeared  is  approximately  as  follows  : in  the  16th  century  the 
lutist  and  theorbist,  in  the  16th  and  17th  the  organist,  in  the 
17th  the  gambist  and  violinist,  and  in  the  18th  the  'cellist, 
flutist  and  oboist.  In  the  17th,  also,  accomplished  clavichord- 
ists  and  harpsichordists  or  cembalists  became  notable,  followed 
in  the  later  18th  by  pianists. 

In  previous  chapters  some  pioneers  and  leading  representatives  in  the 
earlier  classes  have  been  indicated.  Such  lists  in  the  other  classes  cannot 
be  made  exhaustive,  but  certain  leading  names  demand  mention. 

Of  the  many  violinists  of  the  period  the  following  were  either  the  ablest  or 
important  as  pioneers  : — 

Antonio  Vivaldi  (d.  1743),  born  at  Venice,  from  about  1707  choirmaster 
to  a German  prince  at  Mantua,  was  from  1714  in  the  orchestra  of  St.  Mark’s, 
Venice,  and  director  of  one  of  the  conservatories.  He  was  a very  fertile  writer, 
producing  about  80  concertos,  many  sonatas,  cantatas  and  arias,  besides  over 
35  operas  (from  1713).  He  supplemented  the  influence  of  Corelli  by  accent- 
ing brilliancy  of  technique  with  the  impulse  of  the  true  virtuoso,  in  addition  to 
solidity  of  construction.  He  pushed  the  concerto  toward  orchestral  dimen- 
sions. Bach  arranged  and  expanded  16  of  his  concertos  for  clavier  and  organ. 


302 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


Johann  Georg  Pisendel  (d.  1755),  who  had  been  a player  at  Dresden  since 
1712,  became  one  of  Vivaldi’s  pupils,  toured  through  Italy  as  a virtuoso,  and 
from  1728  was  concertmaster  at  Dresden,  serving  as  a pioneer  of  style  in 
Germany  (concertos  in  MS.). 

Francesco  Maria  Veracini  (d.  1750)  was  from  1714  a pupil  and  colleague 
of  Vivaldi  at  St.  Mark’s,  from  1717  chamber-composer  at  Dresden,  after  1722 
at  Prague,  in  Italy  again,  and  in  1735-47  at  London,  where  he  produced 
3 operas  and  competed  for  popular  favor  with  Geminiani.  He  was  an  able 
player,  with  a keen  sense  of  effect,  and  contributed  to  the  growth  of  an  intense 
and  passionate  style,  giving  a powerful  impulse  to  the  great  Tartini.  His 
works  (from  1716)  included  sonajtas  and  concertos  of  considerable  difficulty 
and  worth. 

Giuseppe  Tartini  (d.  1770),  who  shares  with  Corelli  the  renown  of  heading 
the  list  of  the  greatest  violinists,  was  an  Istrian,  but  educated  at  Padua,  whence, 
because  of  a secret  marriage  with  Cardinal  Cornaro’s  niece,  he  fled  to  the 
monastery  of  Assisi.  After  studying  composition  for  two  years,  his  marriage 
was  forgiven  and  he  returned  to  Padua,  but  soon  came  under  Veracini's  in- 
fluence at  Venice  and  retired  to  Ancona  to  master  the  violin.  In  1714  he 
discovered  the  acoustical  phenomenon  of  ‘ combination-tones 1 and  began  to 
apply  it  practically.  From  1721  he  was  violinist  and  director  at  S.  Antonio 
in  Padua,  remaining  till  his  death  a half-century  later,  except  for  two  years 
(1723-5)  at  Prague.  In  1728  he  established  a famous  violin-school,  training 
many  great  players.  His  style  united  the  finish  of  Corelli  with  greater  vigor, 
passion  and  daring,  and  he  excelled  in  double-stopping,  trills  and  other 
special  devices  of  effect.  His  practical  works  (from  1734)  included  at  least 
100  sonatas  and  as  many  concertos,  though  incompletely  published.  Many 
of  these  are  still  classics  ; the  most  celebrated  is  the  sonata  II  trillo  del  Diavolo. 
His  L 1 arte  delV  arco  is  a set  of  50  variations  on  a gavotte  of  Corelli’s.  He  was 
also  a significant  student  of  musical  acoustics  (see  sec.  139).  His  theory  of 
bowing  was  an  advance  on  previous  usage,  and  to  facilitate  it  he  cooperated  in 
improvements  in  the  structure  of  bows  (see  sec.  149). 

Francesco  Geminiani  (d.  1762),  born  at  Lucca,  was  a pupil  at  Rome  of 
Corelli.  From  1707  he  was  employed  at  Lucca,  and  from  1710  toured  Italy 
as  a virtuoso,  going  in  1714  to  London,  where,  except  for  a sojourn  at  Paris 
(1748-55),  he  lived  for  almost  50  years,  at  first  being  slightly  associated  with 
Handel.  His  ardent  and  eccentric  temperament  interfered  with  his  success 
as  an  orchestral  leader.  In  later  life  he  rarely  played  in  public,  devoting 
himself  to  teaching  and  some  foolish  business  ventures.  His  works  (from  1716), 
in  the  usual  forms,  were  many  and  ambitious,  but  not  equal  to  Tartini’s.  He 
also  wrote  one  of  the  earliest  violin-methods  (1751),  embodying  Corelli’s 
principles,  with  several  other  less  important  instruction-books. 

Pietro  Locatelli  (d.  1764),  a pupil  of  Corelli  (before  1713),  from  1725  at 
Mantua  and  probably  from  1732  at  Amsterdam,  was  one  of  the  earliest  of  the 
clever  jugglers  with  the  violin  in  the  display  of  dexterity  and  peculiar  devices  of 
tuning.  His  works  (from  1721),  however,  setting  aside  the  studies  and  show- 
pieces, contain  some  strong  passages. 

Giovanni  Battista  Somis  (d.  1763)  studied  under  both  Corelli  and  Vivaldi 
and  then  worked  wholly  at  Turin,  founding  a noted  school  of  players  in  that 


IMPORTANT  VIOLINISTS 


303 


part  of  Italy  and  serving  as  an  important  link  between  Italian  and  French 
players  (sonatas,  1722-34). 

Jean  Marie  Leclair  (d.  1764,  murdered)  was  originally  a dancer  at  Rouen 
and  then  at  Turin,  where  he  became  a pupil  of  Somis.  From  1729  he  was 
in  the  Opera  orchestra  at  Pans  and  from  1731  in  the  royal  orchestra,  but  soon 
turned  to  composition  and  teaching.  He  was  influenced  by  Locatelli,  but  had 
marked  gifts  of  grace  and  invention  of  his  own.  His  works  (from  1723)  in- 
cluded fine  sonatas,  concertos,  trios,  an  opera  (1747)  and  a ballet. 

Johann  Gottlieb  Graun  (d.  1771),  the  elder  brother  of  K.  H.  Graun,  studied 
with  Pisendel  at  Dresden  and  with  Tartini  at  Padua.  After  short  terms  at 
Merseburg  and  Arolsen,  he  became  in  1732  leader  for  the  Crown  Prince 
Frederick  at  Rheinsberg,  following  him  at  his  accession  in  1740  to  Berlin, 
remaining  in  his  employ  over  40  years.  By  his  own  playing,  his  training  of  the 
conspicuous  royal  orchestra  and  his  many  works  (from  about  1725)  he  con- 
tributed much  to  the  sound  establishment  of  German  violin  music.  He  also 
wrote  cantatas  and  a Passion  (MS.). 

Franz  Benda  (d.  1786),  the  eldest  of  a talented  family,  was  a choirboy  at 
Prague  and  Dresden,  and  early  became  one  of  the  finest  virtuosi  in  Germany, 
excelling  not  only  in  dexterity,  but  in  profound  expression.  He  entered 
Frederick’s  orchestra  in  1733,  soon  after  Graun,  and  in  1771  succeeded  the 
latter  as  leader.  His  beautiful  and  affecting  style,  somewhat  akin  to  Tartini’s, 
became  a model  to  many  successors.  His  works  (from  about  1733)  included 
sonatas,  trios,  concertos,  etudes,  etc.  (many  in  MS.). 

Felice  de’  Giardini  (d.  1796),  a pupil  of  Palladini  at  Milan  and  of  Somis 
at  Turin,  early  developed  virtuosity,  appearing  at  Rome  and  Naples  before 
1730.  In  1748  he  went  to  Germany  and  from  1750  had  immense  success 
in  London,  where  at  intervals  during  the  next  40  years  he  conducted  the 
opera  and  various  choral  festivals,  besides  teaching  singing.  He  died  (80 
years  old)  while  managing  an  operatic  troupe  in  Russia.  He  was  a skillful 
player,  somewhat  given  to  display  in  his  early  days,  and  an  industrious  com- 
poser in  a good  style  (from  about  1750).  He  also  wrote  several  operas 
(1756-64),  but  had  more  success  with  the  oratorio  Ruth  (1763-8).  His 
significance  lay  in  his  stimulus  to  English  players. 

Johann  Stamitz  (d.  1757),  a self-taught  player,  appeared  at  Frankfort  in 
1742  and  from  1743  was  leader  of  the  Mannheim  orchestra,  which  under  his 
direction  became  famous  for  its  unanimity,  shading  and  verve.  He  wrote 
much  both  for  violin  alone  and  for  orchestra  (see  sec.  147). 

Less  notable  names  are  Pietro  Castrucci  (d.  1769),  one  of  Corelli’s  pupils, 
who  came  to  London  in  1715  and  later  was  Handel’s  first  violin  (till  1737), 
and  who  invented  the  ‘ violetta  marina’  (a  form  of  viola  d’  amore  for  which 
Handel  wrote  obbligati)  ; and  Carlo  Tessarini  (d.  after  1762),  from  1729  a 
player  at  St.  Mark’s  in  Venice  and  from  1741  at  Urbino,  whose  extensive 
works,  including  concerti  grossi,  are  in  the  Corelli  style,  besides  a method 
(1740- 

Giovanni  Pietro  Guignon  (d.  1774),  a player  in  the  royal  band  at  Paris  from 
1 733?  secured  the  revival  for  himself  in  1741  of  the  grotesque  mediaeval  office 
of  * Roi  des  violons,’  with  monopoly- rights  in  the  whole  practice  of  music  as  a 
profession.  In  1750,  in  view  of  the  general  censure  of  this  act,  the  office  was 


304 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


emptied  of  its  rights  and  emoluments,  and  Guignon  resigned  the  title  before 
his  death.  (See  under  Afanoir,  sec.  108.) 

Among  the  gambists  Marin  Marais  (d.  1728)  was  the  most  famous  (see  sec. 
1 12),  and  he  was  succeeded  in  the  royal  band  at  Paris  by  his  son  Roland  Ma- 
rais (pieces,  1735-8).  Without  adding  further  names,  it  may  be  noted  that 
the  last  great  player  on  the  gamba  was  Karl  Friedrich  Abel  (d.  1787),  a choir- 
boy  under  J.  S.  Bach  at  Leipsic,  from  1746  court-player  at  Dresden,  and  from 
1759  in  London,  where  in  1765-81  he  collaborated  with  Christian  Bach  in 
concerts.  He  was  an  able  musician  and  wrote  good  chamber  music  and 
popular  symphonies. 

Among  the  violoncellists  an  Italian  pioneer  was  Franciscello  (d.  after  1730), 
known  only  through  the  reports  of  able  critics  who  visited  Rome  between  1715 
and  1730.  Another  eminent  Italian  player  was  Salvatore  Lanzetti  (d.  c. 
1780),  who  was  trained  at  Naples,  but  spent  his  life  at  Turin,  publishing  sona- 
tas and  studies  (1736)  and  visiting  Frankfort  in  1751.  One  of  the  earliest 
players  in  France  was  Batistin  Stuck  (d.  1755),  the  opera-writer  (see  sec.  127)  ; 
but  the  real  founder  of  the  French  school  was  Martin  Berteau  (d.  1756),  originally 
a gambist,  who  appeared  in  the  Concerts  spirituels  in  1739  and  taught  many 
fine  pupils.  The  ’cello  was  introduced  into  England  in  1728  by  Giacomo 
Bassevi  [Cervetto]  (d.  1783,  over  100  years  old),  followed  by  his  son,  known 
as  James  Cervetto,  Jr.(d.  1837). 

While  the  rise  of  artistic  violin-playing  took  place  in  Italy  and  spread  thence 
to  other  countries,  flute-  and  oboe-playing  seem  to  have  been  earliest  developed 
in  France.  Foremost  in  this  process  were  the  many  members  of  the  Danican- 
Philidor  family,  beginning  with  Jean  (d.  1679),  who  was  royal  piper  from  1659, 
and  his  sons  Andre  (d.  1730),  who  entered  the  king’s  band  probably  about 
1670  as  oboist,  bassoonist  and  cromornist,  and  later  served  as  a patient  copy- 
ist of  musical  works  for  the  royal  library  at  Versailles  (dances  and  ballets  from 
1687),  and  Jacques  (d.  1708),  also  a player  of  various  wind  instruments  in  the 
royal  band.  Each  of  these  brothers  had  four  sons  who  were  more  or  less 
noted  as  players  and  composers,  the  chief  being  Anne  (d.  1728),  Andrd’s  eld- 
est son,  who  was  flutist  in  the  royal  band  from  1702,  wrote  several  operas  (1697- 
1701),  and  founded  the  Concerts  spirituels  in  1725  as  a monopoly  (in  1728 
bought  back  by  the  Opera),  Pierre  (d.  1731),  Anne’s  cousin,  highly  honored 
by  Louis  XIV.  from  before  1700  as  oboist,  flutist  and  violinist  (flute-pieces, 
1717),  and  Francis  Andre  (d.  1795),  Anne’s  brother,  who  first  distinguished 
himself  as  a chess-player,  but  later  developed  into  a popular  opera-writer 
(from  1759).  Omitting  the  last-named,  at  least  ten  members  of  the  family 
contributed  to  the  advance  of  music  for  wood-wind  instruments. 

Similarly,  Henri  Hotteterre  (d.  1683),  a celebrated  maker  at  Paris  of  wood 
instruments,  especially  flutes  and  oboes,  had  two  sons,  Nicholas  (d.  1695), 
from  1668  a noted  oboist  and  bassoonist  in  the  king's  band,  and  Louis,  who 
probably  lived  for  a time  at  Rome  (whence  called  le  Romain ),  but  made  a great 
name  as  a flute-player  before  1700 , also  publishing  a method  (1699?),  many 
solos,  suites,  etc.  (from  1708).  Another  impulse  proceeded  from  Pierre 
Gabriel  Buffardin  (d.  after  1749),  a Proven<^al  who  from  1715  for  almost  35 
years  was  court-flutist  at  Dresden,  with  his  pupil,  the  many-sided  Johann 


INSTRUMENTAL  ENSEMBLES 


305 


Joachim  Quantz  (d.  1773),  whose  original  training  was  as  an  expert  trumpeter 
and  oboist,  as  such  entering  the  court-band  at  Dresden  in  1718  ; but  who  there 
took  up  the  flute  so  successfully  that  he  was  sent  to  Italy,  Paris  and  London 
for  further  experience,  returning  to  Dresden  as  flutist  in  1727.  At  this  time 
the  Crown  Prince  Frederick  heard  him  and  had  him  at  Berlin  twice  a year  to 
give  lessons,  and  from  1741  made  him  chamber-musician  at  a high  salary. 
Quantz  was  a cultivated  musician,  a theorist  and  a critic  of  ability.  For  the 
flute  he  wrote  at  least  500  pieces  of  every  description  (from  1734),  besides  a 
method  (1752).  To  him  are  attributed  some  additions  to  its  mechanism. 
The  extraordinary  interest  of  Frederick  the  Great  (d.  1786),  who  was  himself 
a player  and  composer,  did  much  to  call  attention  to  the  flute,  to  stimulate 
composition  for  it  and  improvements  in  it.  From  1750  its  artistic  impor- 
tance was  fully  established. 

An  important  oboist  was  Alessandro  Besozzi  (d.  1775),  in  court  service  at 
Turin  from  1731,  who  with  his  two  brothers  made  many  concert- tours.  His 
nephew,  Carlo  Besozzi,  was  in  the  Dresden  court-band  in  1755-92  (oboe-sonatas 
and  concertos). 

As  further  illustrating  the  interest  in  various  other  solo  instruments,  men- 
tion may  be  made  of  Francois  Campion,  in  1703-19  theorbist  at  the  Paris 
Opera,  with  methods  for  the  guitar,  lute  and  theorbo  (1705-30)  and  some 
pieces;  Ernst  Gottlieb  Baron  (d.  1760),  from  1728  court-lutist  at  Gotha, 
from  1732  at  Eisenach,  and  from  1734  in  Frederick’s  employ  as  theorbist  at 
Rheinsberg  and  Berlin,  writing  well-known,  but  not  remarkable,  treatises  on  in- 
struments of  the  lute  class  (1727,  ’56)  ; Fabio  Ursillo  (d.  1759),  a Roman 
arch-lutist,  flutist,  guitarist  and  violinist  who  worked  at  Tournai  from  1725 
(string-trios  from  about  1735)  5 and  Henri  and  Charles  Baton,  players  on  the 
musette  (bagpipe)  and  vielle  (hurdy-gurdy)  at  Paris,  the  latter  with  pieces 
(from  1733)  and  a work  on  the  vielle  (1757). 

134.  Instrumental  Ensembles.  — With  the  improvement  of  solo 
instruments  and  the  growth  of  virtuosity  came  notable  advances 
in  concerted  music  for  particular  groups,  like  the  string- trio  or 
quartet,  for  the  small  or  chamber  orchestra  (strings  and  some 
wood-wind),  and  for  the  large  orchestra.  The  orchestra  proper 
still  continued  to  be  mainly  used  as  a part  of  the  opera  en- 
semble, so  that  distinct  writing  for  it  was  rare  except  in  the  way 
of  overtures  and  special  dramatic  numbers.  But  throughout  the 
early  18th  century  chamber  music  in  the  proper  sense  steadily 
advanced.  Herein  lay  the  germs  of  orchestral  composition, 
for  through  it  were  made  the  necessary  technical  experiments 
for  determining  how  best  to  favor  the  peculiarities  of  the  va- 
rious instruments,  and  how  to  combine  and  contrast  them. 
Through  it,  too,  the  outlines  of  practicable  concerted  forms 
began  to  be  discerned.  All  this  bore  fruit  in  the  next  period 
in  the  practice  of  the  early  symphonists. 


x 


30 6 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


As  regards  the  mastery  of  technical  details,  the  opera  orches- 
tra was  decidedly  important,  since  accompaniments  and  de- 
tached movements  inserted  in  the  dramatic  action  gave  room 
for  great  variety  of  effect  and  expression.  The  finer  opera- 
writers  realized  this,  but  there  were  evident  dangers  and  draw- 
backs also.  In  the  opera  as  then  conceived  the  instrumental 
forces  were  quite  subsidiary  to  the  vocal.  It  was  easy  to  fall 
into  merely  conventional  ways  of  supplying  instrumental  back- 
grounds and  accessories,  embodying  nothing  original  or  force- 
ful. Furthermore,  for  the  opera  the  orchestral  instruments 
were  necessarily  much  used  in  large  masses,  with  many  players 
to  a part,  a condition  somewhat  hostile  to  delicacy  of  treatment. 
Operatic  music,  then,  told  less  for  the  minute  internal  improve- 
ment of  instrumentation  than  for  its  massive  popularity. 

In  the  small  or  chamber  group,  on  the  other  hand,  there  was 
as  a rule  but  one  player  to  a part,  the  total  effect  required  that 
each  player  and  each  instrument  should  be  above  the  average, 
and  individuality  of  detail  was  far  more  indispensable.  Hence 
chamber  music,  though  not  influential  upon  the  broad  outlines  of 
scoring,  constantly  stimulated  attention  to  its  fine  inner  texture. 

The  make-up  of  the  operatic  orchestra  now  became  practically  what  it  is 
to-day,  with  the  important  exception  of  the  clarinets  and  their  relatives 
(see  sec.  147).  But  the  quality  of  some  of  the  instruments  was  somewhat 
different,  especially  that  of  the  oboes  and  of  the  brass,  the  former  being 
more  masculine  and  the  latter  more  dominated  by  the  true  trumpet  tone. 
The  balance  of  qualities  was  generally  very  different,  since  throughout  the 
early  1 8th  century,  and  to  some  extent  afterward,  the  wood-wind  was  very 
strong  in  proportion  to  the  strings.  In  particular,  oboes  and  bassoons 
were  multiplied,  somewhat  as  clarinets  are  now  in  a military  band.  The 
full  or  tutti  effects  were  therefore  very  different  in  timbre  from  those  now 
heard.  But  skillful  writers,  like  Handel,  made  much  of  contrasts  in  suc- 
cessive movements  between  groups  of  instruments,  variously  selected. 
Furthermore,  many  passages  were  written  for  only  the  slender  resources 
of  the  string-quartet  or  of  the  chamber  band,  each  part  without  ripieni  and 
often  one  of  them  in  the  rdle  of  a solo.  Bach  was  fond  of  working  out 
varied  patterns  of  this  kind  with  ingenuity  and  nervous  vigor.  It  is  also 
to  be  remembered  that  the  harpsichord  or  the  organ  was  still  essential  to 
the  orchestra,  filling  in  many  passages  alone  and  cooperating  in  the  tuttis. 
The  conductor  almost  invariably  led  from  this  central  instrument. 

For  chamber  music  many  slightly  different  schemes  were  used,  selected 
usually  from  violins,  ’cellos,  flutes,  oboes,  bassoons,  horns  and  trumpets, 
generally  not  more  than  two  of  any  one  sort.  The  frequent  absence  of 
the  viola  or  tenor  violin  is  somewhat  notable. 


THE  CLAVICHORD,  HARPSICHORD  AND  PIANO  307 


135.  Keyboard  Stringed  Instruments.  — Throughout  the  18th 
century  three  main  types  of  stringed  instruments  with  a key- 
board were  in  constant  and  conspicuous  use  — the  clavichord, 
the  harpsichord  and  the  pianoforte,  the  first  two  in  more  than 
one  form.  The  clavichord  and  the  harpsichord  were  inherit- 
ances from  previous  centuries,  while  the  pianoforte  was  new. 
So  far  as  the  keyboard  itself  went,  the  three  were  not  distin- 
guishable. Their  mechanical  differences  lay  in  the  way  in 
which  the  strings  were  sounded,  and,  incidental  to  this,  in  the 
method  of  stringing.  Tonally  and  artistically  they  differed 
considerably.  For  a time  each  was  felt  to  have  its  own  special 
utility,  but,  as  the  pianoforte  was  gradually  improved,  its  supe- 
riority became  so  manifest  that  finally,  at  the  close  of  the  cen- 
tury, it  had  practically  driven  the  others  from  the  field. 

The  clavichord  was  a keyboard  application  of  the  principle  of  the  medi- 
aeval monochord,  which  was  not  so  much  a musical  instrument  as  a device 
for  the  study  of  intervals.  The  monochord  (as  its  name  show's)  had 
properly  but  one  string,  stretched  by  a weight  over  a soundboard,  and  a 
movable  bridge  by  which  the  string  could  be  divided  into  parts  having 
some  desired  mathematical  ratio  to  each  other  and  hence  giving  tones  in 
the  corresponding  harmonic  relation.  The  essential  feature  was  that  the 
pitch  of  the  tones  was  fixed  by  the  placing  of  the  bridge.  In  the  clavi- 
chord each  key  of  the  keyboard  brought  to  bear  upon  some  string  a 
metal  (brass)  ‘ tangent,’  which  was  driven  against  the  string  and  held 
there  like  the  monochord  bridge,  the  point  of  its  impact  determining 
the  pitch  of  the  tone.  (The  vibration  of  the  string  took  place  only  on 
one  side  of  the  tangent,  the  other  part  of  the  string  being  deadened 
by  a strip  of  cloth.)  The  strings  were  all  of  about  the  same  length, 
and  often  two  or  even  three  keys  operated  the  same  string  so  far  as  this 
could  be  managed  without  interference,  thus  diminishing  the  total  size 
of  the  instrument  and  facilitating  its  tuning.  In  the  earliest  clear 
references  to  the  clavichord  (16th  century)  the  number  of  keys  was 
about  20,  and  in  the  18th  century  the  compass  seldom  exceeded  four  oc- 
taves (that  is,  less  than  50  keys),  but  the  number  of  strings  might  be 
much  less.  In  time,  however,  clavichords  were  often  made  with  a string 
for  each  key.  These  were  called  ‘bundfrei1  or  ‘unfretted,1  while  the 
others  were  * gebunden  1 or  ‘ fretted.1  The  outward  shape  of  the  instru- 
ment was  that  of  a simple  rectangular  box  (usually  without  legs),  not  too 
large  to  be  carried  under  the  arm.  The  case  and  inside  of  the  cover 
were  often  ornamented. 

The  clavichord  tone  was  thin,  metallic  (since  both  strings  and  tangents 
were  made  of  brass),  and  never  powerful.  Since,  however,  its  character 
was  directly  dependent  upon  the  pressure  of  the  key,  it  could  be  deli- 
cately graded  as  to  force,  and  even  be  prolonged  and  given  a peculiar 
wavy  effect  by  rocking  or  pulsating  the  finger  (‘bebung1).  Accordingly, 


308 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


THE  CLAVICHORD,  HARPSICHORD  AND  PIANO  309 


composers  like  J.  S.  Bach  and  his  sons,  Haydn,  Mozart  and  Beethoven 
admired  the  clavichord  because  of  its  sympathetic  expressiveness.  But 
it  was  distinctly  a private  or  domestic  instrument,  lacking  the  sonority 
and  ictus  for  public  use.  Late  examples,  however,  sometimes  had  two 
strings  to  a note  for  greater  power.  Its  manufacture  ceased  before  the 
19th  century,  though  instruments  lingered  in  use  long  after  1800. 

The  harpsichord  was  simply  a keyboard  zither  or  psaltery.  For  each 
key  of  the  keyboard  there  was  a corresponding  string,  past  which  de- 
pressing the  key  pushed  a jack  from  whose  side  projected  a small  quill  or 
spine  by  which  the  string  was  snapped  or  twanged.  When  the  key  was 
released,  the  quill,  which  was  jointed,  slipped  back  into  its  first  position 
and  a damper  fell  upon  the  string.  The  strings  varied  in  length  accord- 
ing to  pitch.  Hence  the  frame  tended  to  be  roughly  triangular  or  wing- 
shaped (whence  the  German  name  ‘fliigel1),  resembling  a modern  grand 
piano.  The  smaller  varieties,  known  as  ‘ spinets 1 or  ‘ virginals,1  had  the 
strings  running  from  side  to  side,  but  in  larger  ones  they  stretched  away 
from  the  keyboard.  An  upright  form,  the  ‘ clavicytherium,’  was  also 
occasionally  made.  Large  instruments,  for  the  sake  of  varied  qualities, 
often  had  two  or  more  keyboards,  each  provided  with  a special  form  of 
jack  and  quill.  The  cases  and  covers  were  often  highly  ornate,  and, 
when  the  instrument  had  legs,  these,  too,  were  often  elaborate. 

The  harpsichord  tone  was  vigorous  and  sonorous,  especially  in  the 
larger  varieties,  with  a peculiar  reedy  quality.  It  had  a decided  ictus  from 
the  snap  of  the  quill  past  the  string.  But  it  could  not  be  reduced  in 
power  below  a certain  point  without  1 blocking  ’ (though  variations  in 
power  were  often  secured  by  some  sort  of  opening  and  closing  shutter  or 
lid,  controlled  by  a foot-lever).  Neither  could  its  character  be  much 
varied.  Until  late  in  the  18th  century  the  harpsichord  was  the  standard 
instrument  for  the  theatre  and  concert-room,  and  for  all  chamber  combi- 
nations. For  public  use  it  was  often  made  with  two  or  three  strings  to  the 
note.  It  was  no  longer  made  after  1800,  though  its  use  continued  later. 

The  early  history  of  both  the  clavichord  and  the  harpsichord  cannot 
be  traced.  It  seems  likely  that  both  were  known  as  early  as  the  14th 
century,  but  definite  data  begin  with  the  16th.  Their  manufacture  was 
more  or  less  associated  with  that  of  the  organ  till  the  17th,  when  the 
famous  Ruckers  family  of  Antwerp  raised  harpsichord-making  to  the 
grade  of  a fine  art.  In  the  18th  century  Paris  and  London  were  the  lead- 
ing headquarters  of  good  makers.  The  excellence  of  the  best  instru- 
ments lay  chiefly  in  the  perfection  of  their  soundboards  and  the  delicacy 
and  precision  of  the  action. 

The  pianoforte  (or  ‘ fortepiano,’  as  at  first  called)  is  essentially  a key- 
board dulcimer.  Each  key  has  its  own  string,  sounded  by  a blow  from  a 
recoiling  hammer  that  has  a padded  head.  Its  invention  was  delayed 
until  the  making  of  clavichords  and  harpsichords  was  well  advanced, 
since  its  success  depended  on  mature  experience  in  constructing  frames, 
soundboards  and  key-action,  as  well  as  in  the  drawing  of  heavy  wire.  In 
the  clavichord  and  harpsichord  the  strings  needed  to  have  some  lightness 


3io 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


THE  CLAVICHORD,  HARPSICHORD  AND  PIANO  31 1 


and  flexibility,  but  in  the  piano  they  had  to  be  much  heavier  and  drawn 
very  taut.  In  the  latter,  too,  the  space  required  for  the  hammers  necessi- 
tated a gap  in  the  soundboard  at  one  end.  The  hammer-action  was 
more  complicated  than  any  of  the  direct  jack-actions,  since  the  hammer 
must  be  thrown  freely  against  the  string,  must  then  recoil  instantly,  and 
the  damper  meantime  must  be  kept  off  the  string  till  the  key  was  released. 
The  devices  employed  to  secure  all  these  results  in  the  smallest  space  and 
with  the  minimum  of  resistance  and  noise  have  been  far  too  many  to  be 
here  enumerated.  The  earliest  instruments  resembled  the  harpsichord  in 
shape,  like  the  modern  ‘ grand,’  but  from  perhaps  1 760  they  were  made 
after  the  clavichord  style,  like  the  modern  ‘ square  ’ ; still  later  the  now 
popular  ‘upright’  was  added.  Most  of  the  great  improvements  in  de- 
tailed mechanism,  including  the  introduction  of  a metal  frame,  strength- 
ened by  braces,  and  of  steel  wire  of  the  finest  quality  in  place  of  the 
original  brass,  as  well  as  the  gradual  development  of  a perfect  action, 
belong  to  the  19th  century. 

The  pianoforte  tone  is  quite  distinct  from  that  of  its  predecessors, 
since  it  uses  the  latent  sonority  of  a tense  and  heavy  wire,  actuated  by  a 
stroke  from  a soft,  yielding  hammer-head.  It  has  a vigorous  ictus,  and, 
if  the  hammer-heads  be  good,  an  almost  vocal  roundness  and  sweetness. 
Its  loudness  can  be  indefinitely  varied  (whence  its  name)  and  the  char- 
acter of  its  tone  considerably  modified  by  varying  the  touch.  Hence 
the  piano  has  proved  to  have  all  the  excellences  of  both  the  clavichord 
and  the  harpsichord,  with  several  peculiar  to  itself.  To  increase  its  power 
and  breadth  it  is  now  commonly  made  with  two  or  three  strings  to  the 
note,  and  has  pedals  by  which  the  dampers  may  be  held  up  at  will,  the 
number  of  strings  affected  by  the  hammers  reduced,  felts  inserted  between 
the  hammers  and  the  strings,  etc.  On  account  of  its  mechanical  imma- 
turity, it  did  not  come  into  public  use  until  about  1765,  but  before  1800  it 
had  already  become  accepted  as  the  keyboard  instrument  par  excellence. 

Some  experiments  toward  a hammer-instrument  may  have  been  made  early 
in  the  17th  century,  but  what  they  were  is  unknown.  About  1695  Pantaleon 
Hebenstreit  (d.  1750),  a dancing-master  at  Merseburg,  devised  an  enlarged  and 
improved  dulcimer  (with  185  strings),  which  in  1705  he  exhibited  before  Louis 
XIV.  at  Paris.  His  success  with  it  secured  him  court-positions  at  Eisenach 
from  1706  and  at  Dresden  from  1714.  His  dulcimer,  commonly  known  as  the 
‘pantaleon’  or  ‘pantalon’  (from  his  first  name),  was  without  a keyboard. 
Before  1709  Bartolomeo  Cristofori  (d.  1731),  an  able  harpsichord-maker,  origi- 
nally of  Padua,  but  from  about  1687  of  Florence,  began  to  make  hammer- 
claviers  which  were  described  by Scipione  Maffei(p.  1755)  in  1711.  Cristofori, 
then,  appears  to  have  been  the  inventor  of  the  true  pianoforte.  The  only 
extant  specimens  of  his  work,  dating  from  1720  and  1726,  have  all  the  essen- 
tial elements  of  the  complete  action,  even  to  the  check  to  catch  the  hammer 
on  its  recoil.  They  have  two  strings  to  the  note  and  a compass  of  and  4 
octaves  respectively.  How  many  pianos  Cristofori  made  is  not  known,  but 
his  fame  as  an  inventor  extended  to  Germany  as  early  as  1720  Other  pioneer 
experimenters  were  the  Parisian  harpsichord-maker  Marius,  who  exhibited 
models  of  hammer-actions  in  1716,  and  Christoph  Gottlieb  Schroter  (d.  1782), 


312 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


from  1726  organist  at  Minden  and  from  1732  at  Nordhausen,  who  in  1738 
claimed  that  he  had  made  models  between  1717  and  1721.  Neither  of  these 
efforts  seems  to  have  been  connected  with  Cristofori’s  or  to  have  had  any  result. 
The  next  practical  step  was  taken  by  Gottfried  Silbermann  (d.  1753),  a noted 
organ-builder  at  Freiberg,  who  at  intervals  from  1726  made  several  pianos  on 
the  Cristofori  model  (mostly,  it  seems,  for  Frederick  the  Great).  But  it  was 
not  till  after  1755  an<3  i*1  England  that  piano-making  became  a business  of 
importance  (see  sec.  160). 

136.  Tuning  and  Temperament.  — The  practical  problem  of 
tuning  all  keyboard  instruments  is  an  intricate  one,  unless  play- 
ing is  to  be  confined  to  but  a single  scale  or  tonality,  or  unless 
the  number  of  keys  to  the  octave  is  many  more  than  twelve. 
Back  of  it  all  lies  the  question  of  the  true  theory  of  intervals, 
which  began  to  be  discussed  six  centuries  before  the  Christian 
era  (by  Pythagoras).  And,  however  this  question  is  answered, 
the  moment  that  the  fundamental  scale  is  augmented  by  chro- 
matic tones  or  the  slightest  modulation  attempted,  difficulties 
begin  to  multiply.  Hence  discussions  of  tuning  steadily  in- 
creased from  the  16th  century  onward.  The  earliest-known 
formal  system  of  tuning  dates  from  1571  (Ammerbach),  though 
this  came  far  from  solving  the  problem. 

The  Pythagorean  theory  of  intervals,  which  ruled  until  the  16th  cen- 
tury, rested  on  the  assumption  that  the  perfect  fifth  (|)  is  the  only  unit, 
beside  the  octave,  to  be  used  in  laying  out  scales.  The  theoretical  objec- 
tion to  this  is  that  if,  from  any  starting-tone,  like  C,  a series  of  twelve 
fifths  is  laid  out  (C-G,  G-D,  etc.,  disregarding  octaves),  the  final  C will 
be  almost  a quarter  of  a semitone  too  sharp..  The  most  serious  practical 
difficulty  began  to  be  felt  as  soon  as  the  progress  of  harmonic  feeling 
revealed  the  beauty  and  utility  of  the  major  triad,  for,  to  be  smooth,  this 
required  a major  third  (§)  distinctly  flatter  than  the  Pythagorean  third 
(f^).  The  recognition  of  this  true  third  (beginning  early  in  the  16th 
century)  gave  a major  scale  with  the  ratios,  1,  f,  £,  f,  §,  f,  2,  that  is, 
one  made  up  of  three  exactly  similar  triads,  1-3-5,  5~7~ 2>  4-6-8  (e.g., 
C-E-G,  G-B-D,  F-A-C). 

But  this  perfected  scale,  admirable  as  it  was  for  diatonic  harmony  with- 
out modulation,  proved  difficult  to  use  in  determining  chromatic  tones ; 
for  if  F#,  for  example,  was  taken  as  the  third  of  D in  the  triad  D-F#  -A, 
then  A proved  to  be  flat  by  a ‘comma1  (f£),  and  if  I&,  similarly,  was 
deduced  from  F,  then  D was  a comma  sharp,  and  so  on.  Modulation  by 
one  remove  in  either  direction  always  made  at  least  one  tone  in  the  new 
scale  slightly  false,  and  every  further  remove  made  matters  steadily  worse. 
Any  attempt,  therefore,  to  tune  a keyboard  instrument,  like  the  organ 
or  the  harpsichord,  by  first  making  some  one  scale  true  and  then  making 
some  other  scale  also  true  and  then  another,  broke  down  at  the  first  step 
and  ended  in  total  confusion. 


TUNING  AND  TEMPERAMENT 


313 


The  removal  of  the  difficulty  had  to  be  sought  through  some 
system  of  * temperament,’  that  is,  by  deliberately  falsifying 
some  tones  by  a very  small  amount  so  that  practical  effects 
might  either  be  truer  or  that  the  error  might  be  so  distributed 
as  to  be  unnoticeable.  Two  principal  systems  of  temperament 
or  practical  tuning  have  had  historic  importance,  the  ‘ mean-tone  ’ 
system,  which  was  in  general  use  through  the  18th  century,  and 
often  held  to,  especially  for  organs,  till  much  later,  and  the 
* equal’  system,  which  was  first  suggested  just  before  1700,  came 
into  more  or  less  use  during  the  18th  century,  though  not  for 
the  organ,  and  has  now  become  universal.  The  former  system 
sought  to  make  certain  selected  keys  or  tonalities  as  good  as  pos- 
sible at  the  expense  of  certain  others  which  were  outlawed.  The 
latter  system  seeks  to  make  all  keys  alike  and  therefore 
equally  usable,  but  in  doing  so  is  forced  to  make  all  of  them 
equally  incorrect  by  small  amounts. 

The  ‘mean-tone1  system  is  so  called  because  it  assumed  that  the  inter- 
val of  a ‘ tone 1 (as  C - D)  is  in  tuning  to  be  made  halfway  (or  a ‘ mean  ’) 
between  the  larger  or  Pythagorean  ‘tone  1 (§)  and  the  smaller  (^°),or, 
in  other  words,  that  the  major  thirds  were  as  far  as  possible  to  be  true, 
but  the  fifths  a quarter-comma  flat.  The  result  of  this,  if  C is  taken  as 
the  starting-point,  is  that  E and  At7  are  correct,  C , F and  A a quarter- 
comma  sharp,  E7,  G and  B a quarter-comma  flat,  D,  F#  and  B i7  exactly 
midway  between  their  two  possible  values,  and  D^,  D#,  Gi7,  G#  and 
A#  more  or  less  unusable.  (By  a slightly  different  application  of  the  system, 
however,  G#  might  be  made  correct,  but  A unusable.)  The  deviations 
of  the  worst  intervals  approached  a half-semitone,  and  these  collectively 
were  known  as  the  ‘ wolf,1  to  ‘ drive 1 which  ‘ out 1 of  the  other  intervals  and 
into  them  was  the  object  of  tuning.  This  system  was  admirable  so  long  as 
composers  confined  themselves  to  certain  scales  or  keys.  The  major  keys 
of  C,  G,  D,  F,  B*7,  E7,  and  the  minor  keys  of  C,  G,  D,  were  very  good, 
but  all  others  bad  (if  G&  were  favored  instead  of  A*?,  A major  would  take 
the  place  of  E^  major  and  A minor  that  of  C minor).  Free  modulation 
was  impossible,  especially  in  the  use  of  minor  keys.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  sweetness  of  the  major  thirds  in  the  ‘ good  1 keys  was  a decided 
advantage. 

The  ‘ equal 1 system  is  so  called  because  it  assumes  that  the  octave  is  to 
be  divided  into  twelve  exactly  equal  semitones,  making  every  interval  in 
every  scale  or  key  equal  to  the  same  interval  in  all  other  scales  or  keys. 
The  result  of  this,  if  C is  taken  as  the  starting-point,  is  that  F and  G are 
almost  exactly  correct,  D and  B^  very  good  in  certain  relations,  but  the 
one  sharp  and  the  other  flat  in  others,  C#,  D#,  G#  and  A#  decidedly 
sharper  than  they  should  be,  D ?,  Et7  and  At7  rather  flatter  than  they  should 
be,  and  F#  and  G&  either  moderately  sharp  or  flat  in  some  relations  or 


314 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


seriously  so  in  others.  Exactly  what  is  true  of  the  scale  of  C is  true  of 
every  other  possible  key.  This  system  is  admirable  for  music  in  which 
all  keys,  major  and  minor,  are  liable  to  be  used,  since  whatever  effect  is 
produced  in  one  is  exactly  reproduced  in  the  rest.  It  also  favors  enhar- 
monic shifts  of  every  sort.  It  is  noticeable,  also,  that  the  sharped  in- 
tervals are  sharper  and  the  flatted  intervals  flatter  than  they  should  be, 
thus  accentuating  the  alterations  from  the  diatonic  scale  which  led  to  the 
nomenclature  of  the  chromatics  (a  process  often  observable  in  the  playing 
of  instruments  of  free  intonation,  like  the  violin,  and  also  in  singing). 
On  the  whole,  however,  the  restfulness  of  the  major  thirds  is  sacrificed  to 
the  brilliance  and  perfection  of  the  fifths  and  fourths. 

It  must  be  added  that  the  above  theoretical  comparison  of  the  two 
systems  holds  good  only  so  far  as  each  is  perfectly  carried  out  by  tuners 
and  as  the  instruments  stand  as  they  are  tuned.  Under  either  of  them  un- 
conscious or  intentional  deviations  may  be  made  by  the  tuner,  and  the 
structure  or  condition  of  the  instrument  may  speedily  introduce  further 
changes.  It  is  an  uninvestigated  subject,  how  much  the  peculiarities  of  the 
two  systems  or  of  their  traditional  use  by  tuners  has  to  do  with  the  as- 
serted differences  between  keys  in  emotional  character. 

If  it  were  practicable  to  make  keyboards  with  fifty-three  keys  to  the 
octave,  it  would  be  possible  to  play  in  all  scales  in  pure  intonation. 

Tuning  as  a distinct  occupation  seems  to  have  begun  early  in 
the  17th  century,  and  was  especially  concerned  with  the  harpsi- 
chord. In  the  1 8th  it  steadily  became  more  important,  especially 
as  harpsichords  and  pianos  were  multiplied.  Organ-tuning  was 
still  held  as  a branch  of  organ-making.  Players  on  all  keyboard 
instruments,  however,  long  continued  to  act  as  their  own  tuners 
to  a large  extent. 

In  the  17th  century  tuning  usually  proceeded  from  F,  but  in  the  18th 
and  since  from  C or  A.  The  standard  pitch  of  the  18th  century  was  de- 
cidedly lower  than  now,  if  the  few  data  can  be  trusted  — A = 405-422 
vibrations  per  second,  as  compared  with  Scheibler’s  pitch  of  1834  (A  = 
440),  the  now  generally  accepted  ‘French  pitch  1 of  1859  (A  = 435),  or 
the  practice  of  many  orchestras  till  about  1880  (A  = 450-455).  The 
‘ tuning-fork  ’ as  a device  for  preserving  a standard  pitch  is  said  to  have 
been  invented  in  1711  by  John  Shore  (d.  1753),  a London  lutist. 


CHAPTER  XVIII 


FORMS  OF  COMPOSITION.  THEORY  AND  LITERATURE 

137.  The  Larger  Forms  in  General.  — The  problem  of  method 
or  form  in  composition,  especially  for  instruments,  attracted  in- 
creasing attention  throughout  the  18th  century.  It  was  clearly 
seen  that  no  long  and  elaborate  work  can  be  intelligible  unless 
either  divided  into  comparatively  short  sections,  each  relatively 
complete  in  itself,  or  developed  in  such  stages  and  by  such  orderly 
processes  that  the  mind  can  regard  it  as  an  organic  whole.  Sev- 
eral notable  forms  were  brought  over  from  the  preceding  period 
in  a fair  degree  of  advancement.  These  were  either  perfected 
or  greatly  improved,  so  that  about  1750  the  way  was  open  for 
certain  further  steps  that  were  reasonably  final. 

A complete  and  satisfactory  classification  of  all  the  extended 
forms  in  use  after  1700  is  not  possible,  since  some  of  them  were 
variously  construed  by  different  writers,  so  that  they  overlapped. 
Any  survey  of  them  must  consider  two  points,  first,  how  far 
and  how  they  are  built  up  out  of  more  or  less  distinct  ‘ move- 
ments,’ and  second,  what  internal  method  of  treatment  is  used 
within  single  movements. 

Works  in  several  separate  movements  are  often  called  ‘cyclical,’  though 
this  term  is  better  applied  to  a circling  or  recurrent  treatment  within  a 
movement,  as  in  a rondo  or  in  a stanza-song. 

In  all  large  works  the  division  of  the  whole  into  movements 
was  common.  Thus  the  opera  and  the  oratorio  were  regularly 
made  up  of  distinct  recitatives,  arias,  choruses,  etc.,  the  recita- 
tives usually  serving  as  rather  formless  introductions  to  the 
formal  aria  or  chorus  that  followed.  Thus  the  overture  was  regu- 
larly split  up  into  three  or  four  sections,  each  with  its  own  scheme 
and  subjects.  Thus  sets  of  dances  were  frequent,  in  which  the 
individual  components  were  often  so  complete  in  themselves 
that  they  could  be  used  alone  or  recombined  in  other  orders 
without  special  inconvenience.  In  all  these  cases  the  total  effect 

315 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


316 

in  view  was  plainly  one  of  orderly  variety  or  contrast,  different 
methods  of  handling  being  used  in  succession  so  as  to  maintain 
interest  and  give  scope  for  diverse  procedures. 

Within  movements  at  least  four  general  methods  of  treatment 
were  recognized,  of  which  the  first  belonged  especially  to  vocal 
music  and  the  rest  were  more  associated  in  this  period  with  in- 
strumental music.  First  was  the  method  of  the  da  capo  aria,  a 
form  in  three  principal  sections  — the  first  and  second  in  con- 
siderable contrast  as  to  key  and  style,  and  the  third  repeating 
the  first  more  or  less  literally  — all  homophonic  in  essence,  that 
is,  organized  with  a dominating  melody  and  an  accompaniment 
mainly  harmonic.  This  method  was  not  only  universal  in  the 
solos  and  duets  of  operas,  oratorios  and  cantatas,  but  was  creep- 
ing into  instrumental  works  somewhat.  It  was  distinctly  the 
creation  of  the  later  17th  century,  with  its  strenuous  activity 
in  dramatic  music.  Second  was  the  method  of  various  dances, 
in  which  some  characteristic  rhythm  was  worked  out  in  two 
groups  of  sharp-cut  strains  of  some  definite  number  of  measures 
(strictly  eight),  the  two  set  in  some  contrast,  usually  with  a drift 
in  the  first  from  tonic  to  dominant  harmony  and  back  again  in 
the  second.  This  method  was  typical  in  the  suite  and  in  all  move- 
ments in  dance  style.  Its  origin  was  plainly  in  the  field  of  folk- 
music  and  it  had  been  steadily  making  its  way  into  artistic  music 
since  the  15th  century.  Third  was  the  method  of  formal  or 
virtual  counterpoint,  in  which  several  voice-parts  were  intro- 
duced with  much  individuality  and  made  to  proceed  according 
to  established  rules  of  imitation  or  combination.  This  method 
was  that  of  all  strict  church  music  of  the  old  school  and  of  organ 
music  generally.  It  had  already  reached  its  climax  in  the  formal 
fugue,  both  vocal  and  instrumental,  but  was  liable  to  appear  in 
the  fugal  handling  of  any  sort  of  movement  or  of  a passage 
within  a movement.  In  it  a tripartite  division  was  well  recog- 
nized— exposition  (of  the  subject  or  theme),  development,  re- 
capitulation. Fourth  was  a new  method  which  may  be  called 
the  free  thematic,  which  was  not  controlled  by  the  conventional 
rules  of  counterpoint,  but  operated  more  homophonically  or 
harmonically  in  a variety  of  ways.  The  lay-out  was  usually 
tripartite,  as  in  the  fugue,  but  the  artistic  effect  was  strikingly 
different.  This  method  was  becoming  common  for  certain 
movements  of  forms  like  the  overture,  the  sonata  and  the  con- 


FORMS  OF  COMPOSITION 


317 


certo,  and  was  the  one  that  finally  ousted  the  old  contrapuntal 
methods  from  their  long-held  position  of  supremacy.  In  the 
next  period  it  passed  over  into  what  is  now  known  as  ‘ sonata- 
form.’  Prior  to  1750  composers  had  not  quite  perceived  the  value 
of  a second  subject  or  of  certain  points  of  harmonic  procedure. 

The  above  summary  statement  is  evidently  not  exhaustive.  It  does 
not  include  certain  comparatively  formless  types,  like  the  recitative  or 
the  arioso,  nor  the  variable  form  applied  in  preludes  or  ‘sinfonie1  of 
various  degree,  in  which  the  emphasis  fell  either  upon  the  bold  enun- 
ciation of  a few  chord-sequences  or  melodic  figures  without  any  orderly 
treatment  of  them,  or  upon  a rather  vague  harmonic  musing  before  the 
serious  discussion  of  materials  was  begun. 

The  details  of  some  of  these  larger  forms  are  so  important  as 
to  call  for  special  statement,  together  with  references  to  the 
composers  who  were  prominent  in  determining  them  or  in  using 
them  with  evident  power  and  distinction. 

138.  The  Suite.  — Among  the  forms  in  which  regularity  of  out- 
ward character  was  conspicuous,  was  the  ‘suite’  or  series  of 
dance-tunes.  Such  chains  of  dances  had  been  used  since  early 
in  the  16th  century,  but  more  as  helps  to  actual  dancing  or 
as  capricious  diversions  than  as  a recognized  form  of  pure 
composition.  Somewhat  before  1700  and  still  more  during 
the  first  third  of  the  18th  century,  the  use  of  them  in  an 
artistic  manner  became  notable,  since  they  gratified  the  desire 
for  a form  consisting  of  several  entirely  separate  movements, 
each  with  a clear,  definite  pattern.  Gradually  the  plan  and 
treatment  became  fixed. 

The  name  ‘ suite  1 did  not  acquire  its  technical  meaning  at  first.  Simi- 
lar works  had  been  called  1 lessons  ’in  England,  ‘sonate  da  camera1  in 
Italy,  ‘ ordres 1 in  France,  and  ‘ partien1  or  ‘ partite1  in  Germany. 

Attention  has  already  been  called  (sec.  71)  to  the  early  association  of 
‘pavans1  and  1 galliards.1  This  tentative  plan  was  finally  altered  and  ex- 
tended to  include  at  least  four  movements  : — (a)  a flowing  ‘ allemande 1 in 
quadruple  rhythm,  ( b ) a more  lively  and  emphatic  ‘courante1  in  triple 
rhythm,  (c)  a melodious  and  often  serious  ‘ sarabande 1 in  slow  triple 
rhythm,  and  ( d ) a lively  and  brilliant  ‘ gigue 1 either  in  triple  rhythm  or 
at  least  with  triplet  divisions  of  the  beats.  To  this  scheme  was  often 
prefixed  a prelude  of  some  sort,  not  usually  in  dance-form.  After  the 
sarabande  other  dances  were  often  inserted  according  to  fancy,  some- 
times in  great  profusion.  Conspicuous  among  these  were  the  lively 
‘ passepied  1 and  the  stately  ‘ minuet,1  both  in  triple  rhythm,  the  energetic 
‘ gavotte  1 and  the  virile  ‘ bourree,1  both  in  quadruple  rhythm,  or  the  more 


3i8 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


complicated  1 chaconne 1 and  ‘ passacaglia,1  both  elaborations  upon  a 
ground-bass.  The  original  patterns  of  the  principal  dances  came  from 
various  countries  — the  allemande  probably  from  southern  Germany,  the 
courante  in  one  of  its  forms  from  France,  in  the  other  from  Italy,  the  sa- 
rabande  from  Spain,  the  gigue  from  England.  The  added  forms  were 
chiefly  French. 

In  the  choice  and  order  of  the  movements  the  primary  purpose  was 
variety.  The  allemande  was  usually  understood  to  be  introductory  (even 
when  there  was  a prelude  besides)  ; the  courante  included  matter  re- 
quiring more  close  and  technical  attention ; the  sarabande  had  greater 
lyrical  and  emotional  value ; and  the  gigue  was  originally  the  fullest  of 
life  and  humor,  but  often  was  handled  with  much  contrapuntal  intricacy. 
All  were  usually  in  the  same  key. 

The  suite  was  the  earliest  of  composite  forms  to  reach  maturity. 
It  stands  apart  from  analogous  forms  in  the  comparative  rigidity 
of  the  inner  structure  of  its  movements.  Hence  it  cannot  prop- 
erly be  called  the  direct  ancestor  of  the  modern  sonata  and 
symphony,  though  it  undoubtedly  influenced  them. 

The  dance-form  that  dominates  the  suite  is  somewhat  akin  to  song-form 
in  that  it  consists  of  definite  and  balanced  sections  or  strains.  In  the 
simplest  examples  there  are  two  such  strains,  each  eight  measures  long 
and  both  repeated.  These  are  properly  somewhat  contrasted  in  style, 
the  first  often  ending  in  the  key  of  the  dominant.  But  this  rudimentary 
structure  was  generally  much  expanded,  though  tending  always  to  retain 
the  sharp  partition  into  brief  strains. 

That  which  distinguished  these  dances  from  songs  was  the  prominence 
throughout  of  the  special  rhythmic  or  metric  pattern  that  belonged  to  the 
given  dance.  Whether  or  not  decided  melodic  themes  were  adopted  was 
immaterial,  though  in  artistic  examples  such  themes  were  sometimes  con- 
spicuous. The  treatment  might  be  homophonic,  harmonic  or  contra- 
puntal, or  any  mixture  of  the  three.  Much  ingenuity  was  needed  to  keep 
within  the  strict  bounds  of  the  strains  and  to  maintain  the  characteris- 
tic metric  pattern,  and  yet  to  achieve  continuity,  variety  and  positive 
interest. 

Somewhat  analogous  to  the  suite  in  structural  plan  was  the 
‘double’  or  ‘variation,’  which  also  came  to  be  prominent  in 
the  early  18th  century.  This  was  a series  of  movements  de- 
veloped out  of  a simple  song  or  dance  taken  as  a theme,  each 
successive  movement  presenting  the  theme  either  intact,  but 
with  manifold  decorations,  Or  under  varying  disguises  of  treat- 
ment. Another  allied  form  was  the  ‘ rondo,’  in  which  a melodic 
theme  recurs  at  intervals  without  substantial  change,  the  ap- 
pearances being  separated  by  varying  episodes  or  digressions. 


THE  SUITE 


319 


Both  doubles  and  rondos  were  sometimes  inserted  among  the 
extra  movements  of  the  suite. 

The  formal  unity  of  both  these  forms  inheres  in  the  identity  of  the  theme. 
Hence  both  are  merely  analogous  to  the  suite. 

All  these  were  preeminently  forms  of  chamber  music,  and 
hence  were  felt  to  be  especially  suitable  for  keyboard  instru- 
ments. Their  development  was  a symptom  of  the  growing  im- 
portance of  the  clavichord  and  harpsichord.  While  all  of  them 
had  evident  artistic  limitations  and  tended  always  toward  an 
extreme  of  formal  precision,  yet  their  popularity  served  a use- 
ful purpose.  In  the  hands  of  a few  masters  they  attained  dis- 
tinction and  real  power. 

In  the  treatment  of  the  suite  different  countries  showed  varying 
tendencies.  In  France  the  essential  dance-patterns  were  exalted  for 
their  own  sake  and  their  adaptation  to  the  keyboard  was  prompt  and  able, 
but,  instead  of  developing  the  architectonic  possibilities  of  the  form  as  a 
whole,  composers  tended  to  make  merely  picturesque  or  piquant  series  of 
sketches  conceived  in  a half-dramatic  spirit  and  strung  together  like  the 
scenes  in  a pantomime.  In  Germany,  on  the  other  hand,  the  suite  was 
early  seized  by  organ-composers  as  a field  for  the  exercise  of  polyphonic 
skill,  though  with  a true  sympathy  for  the  dance  idea  underlying  it.  In 
Italy,  again,  the  strictness  of  the  dance-patterns  was  notably  neglected  in 
favor  of  a free  thematic  treatment,  and  the  violin  was  more  employed  as  a 
vehicle  than  the  keyboard. 

Francois  Couperin  (d.  1733)  came  of  a family  of  organists  and  clavecinists 
celebrated  from  about  1650  till  1800,  all  of  them  at  some  time  players  at  St. 
Gervais  in  Paris.  Born  in  1668  and  trained  by  the  organist  Thomelin,  he  be- 
came organist  at  the  king’s  private  chapel  in  1693  and  at  St.  Gervais  in  1698. 
Though  most  famous  in  his  day  as  an  organist,  he  is  now  counted  one  of  the 
founders  of  harpsichord  music.  Besides  an  early  set  of  pieces  (probably  before 
1700),  he  issued  four  notable  collections  (1713-30),  an  instruction-book  (1717), 
and  considerable  chamber  music.  His  pieces  are  grouped  in  ‘ ordres’  of  very 
varied  plan,  usually  fancifully  entitled  and  arranged  in  a half-theatric 4 program.’ 
They  are  a link  between  the  operatic  ballet  and  the  keyboard  suite.  Their 
style  attracted  wide  notice  and  imitation.  With  them  begins  the  exuberant 
development  of  keyboard  ‘graces’  or  embellishments  that  continued  through 
the  century. 

Louis  Marchand  (d.  1732),  a close  contemporary  of  Couperin,  was  also  a lead- 
ing Parisian  organist  before  1700  and  soon  known  as  a clavecinist  (books, 
1702-3).  Exiled  in  1717,  he  visited  Dresden,  where  he  ignominiously  ran 
away  from  a contest  in  organ-playing  with  Bach.  Later  he  was  allowed  to  re- 
turn to  Paris,  and  taught  many  pupils.  He  was  notoriously  conceited,  but  had 
ability  as  player  and  composer. 


320 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


Jean  Philippe  Rameau  (d.  1764),  the  great  opera-writer  (see  sec.  127),  be- 
gan his  career  as  a clavecinist,  and  among  his  works  are  several  collections 
of  pieces  (1706,  ’24-41)  which  rank  close  to  Couperin’s  in  interest  and  impor- 
tance, though  he,  too,  failed  to  develop  the  full  capacities  of  the  suite. 

In  Germany  many  organ-composers  used  the  suite-form  with  originality, 
bringing  out  more  and  more  its  possibilities  of  delicate  and  intricate 
inner  structure.  Data  fail  for  an  exhaustive  list,  but  prominent  names 
just  before  and  just  after  1700  were  those  of  Kuhnau  of  Leipsic  (pieces,  1689, 
’95),  Johann  Krieger  of  Zittau  (1697),  Bohm  of  Liineburg  (before  1700),  Mat- 
theson  of  Hamburg  (1714),  Buttstett  of  Erfurt  (1716),  Telemann  of  Hamburg 
(many  suites  for  small  orchestra,  in  MS.),  Graupner  of  Darmstadt  (1718,  ’22, 
’37),  Muffat  of  Vienna  (c.  1735),  and  J-  P-  Kellner  of  Grafenroda  (1739-49). 
It  is  known  that  Bach  made  careful  study  of  the  suites  of  some  of  these,  as  well 
as  of  French  writers  about  1700. 

J.  S.  Bach  (d.  1750)  wrote  over  20  works  of  the  suite  class,  which  are  justly 
counted  among  his  ablest.  Most  of  them  are  in  the  sets  known  to-day  as  the 
‘French,’  the  ‘English’  and  the  ‘German’  (orchestral  partite),  all  written 
probably  between  1720  and  1730.  In  the  second  and  third  of  these  the  suite 
reached  its  highest  point  of  significance  and  dignity. 

Handel  (d.  1759)  wrote  four  books  of  suites  (1720-33),  which,  though  less 
typical  than  Bach’s  and  much  slighter  in  essential  value,  are  yet  interesting  as 
illustrating  the  varied  applications  of  which  the  form  was  capable. 

After  about  1750  the  suite  became  almost  obsolete,  and  was  not  revived  till 
well  into  the  19th  century. 

139.  The  Fugue.  — Among  the  many  types  of  contrapuntal 
writing,  the  fugue  became  in  the  later  17th  century  easily  the 
chief  (see  sec.  103).  Its  development  was  sought  primarily 
upon  the  organ,  of  which  it  has  remained  the  characteristic  mas- 
ter-form, but  it  was  extended  in  the  early  18th  century  to  the  cla- 
vier and  to  oratorio  choruses.  Fugal  treatment  tended  to  appear 
frequently  in  all  kinds  of  writing,  since  the  artistic  feeling  of 
the  period  was  still  dominated  by  the  old  idea  that  polyphony 
was  the  noblest  method  of  musical  construction. 

The  ‘ fugue’  itself  is  not  a composite  form  — does  not  consist  of  sepa- 
rate movements.  But  with  it  is  very  commonly  associated  a prelude  of 
some  kind,  the  two  together  making  a work  in  two  movements.  Yet  the 
completed  fugue  form  included  somewhat  distinct  sections.  These  are 
(a)  the  enunciation  or  exposition,  in  which  a theme  (‘  subject,’  ‘ dux,’  ‘ pro- 
posta’)  is  given  out  by  some  one  voice-part  in  the  tonic  key,  followed  in  a 
second  voice-part  by  a restatement  of  it  (‘  answer ,’  ‘ comes,’  ‘ risposta’) 
literally  or  approximately  in  the  key  of  the  dominant,  while  the  first  voice- 
part  proceeds  in  counterpoint,  usually  forming  a subsidiary  theme  (‘  coun- 
ter-subject’), followed  by  similar  alternating  propositions  by  the  remaining 
voice-parts  till  all  are  in  action ; (6)  the  development  or  free  fantasia, 

in  which  the  thematic  material  thus  presented  is  elaborately  discussed  by 


THE  FUGUE 


321 


the  several  voice-parts  in  various  contrapuntal  ways,  with  much  freedom 
of  key  and  usually  with  the  insertion  of  episodes,  often  of  considerable 
extent,  the  whole  section  culminating  in  an  extended  passage  on  a sta- 
tionary bass,  usually  the  dominant  (‘  pedal-point1  or  ‘ organ-point  ’)  ; (c)  the 
recapitulation,  in  which  the  theme  as  subject  and  answer  is  again  presented 
by  all  the  voices  in  turn,  often  in  reverse  order  and  usually  with  a crowd- 
ing or  overlapping  of  the  entries  (‘stretto’),  the  whole  leading  to  a 
climax  of  intricacy  and  intensity.  The  ideal  method  throughout  is  to 
keep  to  strictly  polyphonic  devices  and  to  use  many  varieties  of  imitation, 
so  as  to  unfold  fully  the  striking  possibilities  of  the  theme. 

A ‘fugato1  is  a movement  or  passage  treated  with  some  selection  of  the 
above  features,  often  with  many  omissions,  compressions  and  licenses. 

Every  important  composer  of  * the  period,  except  some  of  the 
opera-writers,  was  a fugue-writer  as  a matter  of  course,  and  the 
number  of  fugues  produced  was  enormous,  especially  for  the 
organ.  The  best  of  them  have  hardly  been  surpassed  since. 
Thus  the  old  art  of  counterpoint  began  a new  life,  but  chiefly 
now  in  the  instrumental  rather  than  the  vocal  field. 

It  would  be  entirely  impossible  to  give  any  satisfactory  rdsumd  of  the  many 
fugue-writers.  Of  course,  Bach  overtops  all  his  contemporaries  in  the  organ- 
fugue,  and  his  Wohltemperirtes  Clavier  (1722-44)  was  a monumental  demon- 
stration of  the  suitability  of  the  form  to  the  clavichord  and  hence  to  the 
pianoforte.  Both  he  and  Handel  wrote  majestic  fugues  for  voices  also. 

140.  The  Overture,  Sonata  and  Concerto.  — Besides  the  suite 
and  the  fugue,  there  were  several  other  large  composite  forms 
that  manifested  an  increasing  tendency  to  utilize  principles 
of  development  in  a different  way.  These  were  the  overture, 
originally  a part  of  dramatic  composition,  the  sonata,  originally 
a chamber-work  for  solo  instruments,  and  the  concerto,  origi- 
nally a similar  work  with  orchestral  collaboration.  All  of  these 
were  properly  laid  out  in  three  or  more  distinct  movements. 
While  some  of  these  movements  or  passages  in  them  were  in 
dance-form  and  so  like  extracts  from  a suite,  and  some  were 
polyphonic  and  so  fugues  or  at  least  fugal,  others  were  homo- 
phonic  or  harmonic  in  ways  that  demand  special  notice. 

The  ‘ overture 1 was  properly  an  orchestral  form,  intended  as  the  intro- 
duction to  a dramatic  work.  Of  the  two  existing  plans  for  it,  the  French 
and  the  Italian  (see  sec.  124),  the  latter  had  the  greater  subsequent  in- 
fluence, since,  with  the  insertion  of  a minuet  as  a third  movement  and 
with  some  modifications  of  the  final  movement,  it  led  to  the  plan  of  the 
modern  sonata  and  symphony.  But  the  inner  structure  of  the  first  and 
second  movements  often  presented  points  of  fresh  importance,  because 

Y 


322 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


the  former  tended  to  employ  distinctly  harmonic  methods  in  the  building 
up  of  strong  chord-series  without  conspicuous  thematic  detail,  and  the  lat- 
ter often  passed  over  into  the  homophonic  presentation  of  a melody  with 
accompaniment.  Both  of  these  methods  offered  opportunities  not  pre- 
sented by  set  or  strict  forms  like  the  suite  or  the  fugue. 

The  ‘sonata’ had  already  passed  through  several  stages  before  1700. 
Of  these  that  of  the  later  17th  century,  when  the  ‘sonata  da  chiesa’  was 
distinguished  from  the  ‘sonata  da  camera,’  is  specially  important.  This 
‘ church  ’ sonata,  as  perfected  by  Corelli  and  his  contemporaries,  was 
usually  written  for  from  one  to  three  solo  stringed  instruments,  with  an  ac- 
companiment on  a figured  bass,  the  material  distributed  in  four  move- 
ments (sometimes  three),  alternately  slow  and  quick.  Just  before  1700 
the  type  was  used  for  the  harpsichord  as  well,  so  that  in  the  early  18th 
century  sonatas  were  written  either  for  a solo  instrument,  especially  the 
violin,  or  for  a very  small  group  of  such  instruments,  or  for  the  clavier 
alone,  the  details  of  treatment  differing  considerably  according  to  the  ve- 
hicle adopted.  The  order  of  movements,  if  there  were  four,  was  slow, 
quick,  slow,  quick,  or,  if  three,  quick,  slow,  quick,  and,  as  a rule,  the  first  quick 
movement  was  chief  in  intrinsic  interest.  Within  the  movements,  the  ma- 
terial was  generally  presented  either  in  two  sections,  progressing  from  tonic 
to  dominant  and  back  again,  as  in  dance-forms,  or  in  three  stages  of  exposi- 
tion, development  and  recapitulation,  but  with  no  such  schematic  regu- 
larity as  in  the  fugue.  The  treatment  was  predominantly  thematic,  but 
with  a constant  tendency  to  escape  from  the  comparative  formality  and 
learning  of  polyphony  and  to  utilize  methods  that  were  homophonic  or 
harmonic.  In  all  this  are  to  be  seen  premonitions  of  the  method  of  the 
later  and  modern  sonata,  though  the  importance  of  a second  subject  was 
not  yet  generally  recognized,  nor  the  need  of  a comprehensive  harmonic 
plan  controlling  the  process  of  development  (see  sec.  146).  The  total 
unity  was  sometimes  increased  by  having  some  relation  between  the  sub- 
jects proposed  for  treatment  in  the  different  movements.  But  in  many 
cases  dance-forms  or  fugues  or  variations  were  used  as  movements  with- 
out evident  connection  with  the  rest. 

The  ‘ concerto  ’ was  not  sharply  distinguishable  from  the  sonata,  ex- 
cept in  the  vehicles  of  expression  used.  Originally,  concertos  were  in- 
strumental pieces  in  which  different  orchestral  instruments  or  groups  of 
such  instruments  were  employed  successively  in  combination  or  contrast 
(whence  the  name  concerto , a working  together).  Later,  the  term  was 
limited  to  works  in  which  a solo  instrument,  especially  a violin,  appeared 
in  successive  contrasts  with  a concerted  accompaniment,  the  part  of  each 
element  being  elaborated.  In  the  early  18th  century,  the  name  was  also 
given  to  extended  works  for  either  the  clavier  or  the  organ  alone,  or  for 
all  sorts  of  ensembles  of  orchestral  instruments.  The  number  of  move- 
ments was  variable,  but  tended  to  be  three  or  four.  In  the  plan  and  treat- 
ment of  these  there  was  no  constant  distinction  from  the  sonata.  It  was 
not  until  the  next  period  that  the  concerto  in  precisely  its  modern  sense 
was  undertaken.  Yet  experiments  with  the  form  were  contributing  to  the 
establishment  of  the  modern  type. 


THE  OVERTURE,  SONATA  AND  CONCERTO 


323 


The  fertility  of  the  period  in  forms  of  this  character  was 
notable  in  itself  and  in  its  prefiguring  of  the  completed  sonata- 
form  that  followed.  Instrumental  music  was  approaching  a 
great  culmination,  to  the  success  of  which  many  minds  con- 
tributed and  in  which  several  lines  of  previous  effort  were 
united  and  fused.  In  practical  advance  the  Germans  and  the 
Italians  took  the  lead,  the  former  being  strongest  in  contra- 
puntal methods,  the  latter  in  suggestions  derived  from  operatic 
and  purely  secular  styles.  All  were  feeling  their  way  toward 
architectonic  types  of  the  greatest  breadth. 

Here,  again,  no  exhaustive  survey  of  workers  is  possible.  But  certain 
pioneers  require  special  mention  : — 

Domenico  Scarlatti  (d.  1757),  born  at  Naples  in  1685,  the  son  of  Alessandro 
Scarlatti,  the  opera-writer,  studied  with  him  and  with  Gasparini  at  Rome. 
His  genius  as  a clavecinist  developed  early,  but  his  first  known  works  were 
operas  at  Naples  and  Rome  (from  1704).  In  1709  at  Rome  he  and  Handel 
were  pitted  against  each  other  on  the  harpsichord  and  the  organ,  and  were 
adjudged  equal  on  the  former.  From  1715  he  was  Baj’s  successor  as  choir- 
master at  St.  Peter’s  in  Rome,  from  1719  opera-cembalist  at  London,  from 
1721  court-cembalist  at  Lisbon,  and  from  1729  in  court  service  at  Madrid. 
Of  his  many  clavier  works,  all  notably  compact,  he  himself  published  only  two 
collections  (probably  between  1730  and  1745).  Though  not  fully  appreciated 
in  Italy,  his  extreme  originality  was  widely  known  elsewhere.  He  contributed 
to  the  range  of  keyboard  execution,  especially  in  the  use  of  the  crossed  hands, 
double  runs,  repeated  notes,  wide  skips,  etc.,  and  also  to  the  emancipation  of 
keyboard  composition  from  its  contrapuntal  trammels  in  the  direction  of  a 
free  style  that  was  essentially  modern  in  its  homophonic  and  harmonic  point 
of  view.  He  thus  distinctly  advanced  the  tendency  toward  the  modern 
sonata,  though  his  own  works  were  usually  dances  in  fantasia-form,  and  are 
regularly  cast  in  one  movement  only. 

J.  S.  Bach  (d.  1750),  whose  life  covered  almost  exactly  the  same  years  as 
the  foregoing,  was  a diligent  worker  in  this  field.  In  it,  as  elsewhere,  he  stood 
preeminent  for  depth  of  intuition  and  freshness  of  invention.  His  greatest 
strength  was  put  forth  in  the  sonatas  and  concertos  in  which  solo  instruments 
and  the  clavier  were  combined  in  a semi-orchestral  manner.  In  these,  as  in 
many  preludes,  toccatas,  etc.,  for  the  organ  or  the  clavier  alone,  he  showed  a 
prescient  sense  of  the  contrast  in  subjects  and  the  progress  in  keys  that  mark 
the  later  sonata,  though  his  prevailing  idiom  of  expression  was  too  intricate 
in  texture  for  a permanent  type. 

Karl  Philipp  Emanuel  Bach  (d.  1788),  the  second  surviving  son  of  the  great 
Bach,  was  the  most  important  link  between  this  period  and  the  next  in  the 
use  of  extended  forms.  Born  at  Weimar  in  1714,  thoroughly  trained  in  music 
by  his  father  and  finally  educated  otherwise  at  Leipsic  and  Frankfort,  from 
before  1740  he  was  clavecinist  to  Frederick  the  Great.  In  1767  he  followed 
Telemann  as  cantor  at  Hamburg,  where  the  balance  of  his  life  was  spent.  He 


324 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


was  the  best  keyboard  performer  of  the  middle  of  the  century,  and  through 
his  remarkable  instruction-book  (1753-62)  exerted  a profound  influence  upon 
the  development  of  technique.  He  was  also  a facile  composer,  chiefly  for 
instruments  (over  200  clavier-solos  and  50  concertos,  etc.,  from  1731),  as  well 
as  many  Passions  and  cantatas,  and  2 oratorios.  His  style  differed  greatly 
from  his  father’s,  since  it  concerned  itself  far  more  with  elegance  of  outward 
form  than  with  strength  of  content,  and  since  he  turned  to  more  homophonic 
means  of  expression.  His  genius  lay  in  the  application  of  the  rudimentary 
sonata-form  that  later  was  powerfully  developed  by  Haydn.  It  was  the  study 
in  1749  of  one  set  of  his  sonatas  (1742)  that  gave  Haydn  his  first  strong 
impetus. 

Passing  mention  may  be  made  of  Giovanni  Battista  Sammartini  (d.  1774), 
a choirmaster  and  organist  at  Milan,  who  is  said  to  have  written  almost  3000 
works  of  all  kinds,  among  which  are  numerous  sonatas,  concertos  and  ‘ sym- 
phonies ’ (from  1734)  that  are  sometimes  called  prototypes  of  Haydn’s ; and 
Georg  Christoph  Wagenseil  (d.  1777),  a favorite  pupil  of  Fux  at  Vienna  and 
court-composer  and  teacher  to  the  royal  family  there  from  1739,  an  able 
clavecinist  and  the  composer  of  many  chamber  works  (from  1740),  besides 
10  operas,  2 oratorios  and  some  church  music,  combining  manners  derived 
from  Leo,  Hasse  and  Rameau. 

As  the  middle  of  the  century  approached  there  was  a notable  increase  of 
production  in  chamber  music,  indicating  a widespread  interest  in  both  the 
harpsichord  and  the  small  orchestra.  To  this  movement  many  composers 
contributed,  though  generally  in  styles  so  perfunctory  and  formal  that  it  is 
needless  to  specify  further  names. 

141.  Literature  about  Music.  — A distinguishing  feature  of 
the  literary  treatment  of  musical  subjects  in  the  early  18th 
century  was  the  persistent  and  fruitful  attempt  to  reach  a 
sound  theory  of  harmony  on  the  basis  of  physical  facts  in- 
ductively studied.  The  critical  spirit  of  the  age  was  actively 
displayed  in  the  domain  of  acoustics,  which  then  assumed  its 
modern  form.  Out  of  the  acute  investigation  of  the  physical 
basis  of  music  came  new  conceptions  of  intervals,  tonality  and 
chord-building  which  are  the  nucleus  of  all  present  theory. 
Many  manuals  of  composition  continued  to  be  put  forth  in  larger 
or  smaller  shape,  more  and  more  conforming  to  these  fresh  ideas 
and  tending  to  push  harmony  into  the  place  of  supremacy 
formerly  held  by  counterpoint.  Another  significant  feature  of 
the  time  was  the  rise  of  criticism  as  a distinct  line  of  effort, 
though  its  principles  were  not  yet  systematized  or  its  spirit  made 
judicial.  Significant  advances  were  also  made  in  the  way  of 
encyclopaedic  compendiums,  like  dictionaries,  and  of  valuable 
historical  studies,  with  a few  essays  in  biography.  All  these 


MUSICAL  LITERATURE 


325 


developments  indicated  the  increase  of  that  searching  intel- 
lectual handling  of  musical  structure,  methods,  products  and 
workers  which  in  the  later  18th  century  and  still  more  in  the 
19th  was  to  become  prominent. 

Joseph  Sauveur  (d.  1716)  was  the  founder  of  the  modern  science  of  acous- 
tics, which  he  first  called  by  that  name.  His  work  is  astonishing,  since  he  was 
a deaf-mute  from  infancy,  hearing  never  but  a little  and  acquiring  but  a partial 
use  of  his  voice.  Early  evincing  mathematical  genius,  he  came  to  Paris  in 
1670,  taught  mathematics,  from  1680  in  the  Dauphin’s  household,  and  from 
1690  was  employed  by  the  government  upon  fortification-plans.  From  about 
1696,  with  the  aid  of  musical  assistants,  he  became  absorbed  in  acoustics, 
joined  the  Academie,  and  published  in  its  Transactions  several  epoch-making 
studies  (1700-13).  He  fully  established  the  vibrational  character  of  all 
sound,  examined  the  phenomena  of  vibrating  bodies,  elaborated  the  theory 
of  partial-tones  and  sought  to  base  a system  of  consonance  on  them,  deter- 
mined the  vibration-numbers  of  tones  of  fixed  pitch,  suggesting  256  as  a 
standard  number  for  middle  C,  studied  the  range  of  audibility,  etc.  Contempo- 
raneous with  him  in  the  Academie  was  Louis  Carre  (d.  1711),  a pupil  of  the 
metaphysician  Malebranche,  with  essays  on  sound  and  instruments  (1702-9). 
The  contending  views  of  temperament  were  reviewed  by  Johann  Georg 
Neidhardt  of  Konigsberg  (d.  1739)  several  works  (1706-34),  that  of  1724 
containing  the  first  use  of  logarithms  in  calculating  intervals,  and  by  Christoph 
Albert  Sinn,  a Brunswick  surveyor,  advocating  the  equal  system  (1717). 
Louis  Bertrand  Castel  (d.  1757)  attempted  the  futile  task  of  presenting 
musical  effects  to  the  eye  by  the  use  of  colors  (1725-35),  besides  other 
essays.  Leonhardt  Euler  (d.  1783),  from  1727  a prolific  mathematical  writer 
at  St.  Petersburg,  reexamined  the  general  physics  of  sound,  and  sought  to 
frame  a fresh  theory  of  harmony  from  numerical  principles,  with  rather 
grotesque  results  in  part,  though  his  studies  of  vibrations  were  valuable 
(about  25  works,  1727-74).  Useful  additions  were  made  in  1732  by  Johann 
Bernoulli  of  St.  Petersburg  (d.  1747),  and  in  1753  by  his  son  Daniel  Bernoulli 
(d.  1781).  Georg  Andreas  Sorge  (d.  1778),  from  1722  court-organist  at 
Lobenstein,  wrote  extensively  (from  1741)  upon  sound,  intervals,  temperament, 
instrument-making,  etc.,  often  with  ability,  but  in  an  obscure  style  and  a con- 
tentious spirit;  his  work  on  composition  (1745-7)  led  about  1760  to  a bitter 
debate  with  Marpurg.  Levens  of  Bordeaux  sought  (1743)  to  readjust  scales 
by  a theory  of  reciprocal  overtones  and  undertones,  followed  by  others. 
Robert  Smith  (d.  1768),  professor  of  astronomy  at  Cambridge,  published  a 
good  general  treatise  (1749).  Both  the  chief  editors  of  the  famous  Encyclo- 
pedic (1751—80),  Denis  Diderot  (d.  1784)  and  Jean  le  Rond  d’  Alembert  (d.  1783), 
were  acousticians,  the  former  known  (from  1748)  through  essays,  including  one 
on  a mechanical  organ,  and  the  latter  (from  1747)  through  many  articles  and 
an  exposition  of  Rameau’s  theory  of  harmony  (1752)  ; both  contributed  musical 
articles  to  the  Encyclopedic.  Tartini  (d.  1770),  the  violinist,  was  an  original 
investigator,  as  his  theoretical  works  (from  1754)  show,  being  the  discoverer 
of  combination-tones,  as  also  Sorge  (above),  Romieu  of  Montpellier  (1751) 
and  Jean  Adam  Serre  of  Geneva  (1753)  claimed  to  be. 


326 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


In  the  field  of  theory,  the  period  was  notable  for  several  general  writers  of 
originality,  basing  their  discussions  upon  the  new  acoustics  and  seeking  a 
feasible  system  of  true  harmony  rather  than  of  counterpoint,  the  fundamental 
questions  being  as  to  the  construction  and  relations  of  chords  as  such.  Chord- 
inversions  are  now  for  the  first  time  clearly  recognized. 

Rameau  (d.  1764),  the  distinguished  composer  and  player  (see  secs.  127,138), 
was  the  first  and  long  the  chief  of  the  new  harmonists.  His  views  were  devel- 
oped through  reading  and  reflection  before  he  settled  at  Paris.  When  first 
published  (1722,  ’26),  they  were  not  fully  wrought  out,  but  in  some  20  later 
works  (1730-62)  were  fashioned  into  a system.  Some  of  these  works  dealt 
with  musical  acoustics,  including  temperament,  some  were  mere  attempts  to 
popularize  harmonic  arguments,  some  treated  of  the  musical  defects  of  the 
Encyclopedic,  and  some  were  of  a general  philosophic  character.  Rameau’s 
style  was  often  difficult,  his  ideas  novel,  and  some  of  his  positions  forced ; but 
his  historical  importance  cannot  be  gainsaid.  The  main  points  of  his  theory 
were  that  all  chords  are  deducible  from  the  harmonic  series  (partial-tones), 
are  to  be  built  up  in  thirds,  often  appear  as  inversions  without  loss  of  identity, 
and,  however  presented,  imply  a ‘ fundamental  bass  1 (which  may  not  be  the 
actual  bass),  by  which  they  are  to  be  classified.  The  brilliant  perception  of 
the  truth  about  inversions  and  the  new  search  after  the  roots  of  chords  opened 
the  way  for  later  advance,  though  some  points  were  still  unsatisfactory.  The 
system  was  finely  elucidated  by  d’  Alembert  (1752)  and  extensively  commented 
upon  by  others. 

Fux  (d.  1741),  the  Viennese  master  (see  sec.  121),  took  an  entirely  dif- 
ferent course  in  his  Gradus  ad  Parnassum  (1725).  Holding  still  to  the  old 
modes  and  not  catching  the  drift  of  the  new  acoustics,  he  presented  a system 
of  counterpoint  as  the  centre  of  composition,  the  value  of  which  in  its  field  is 
shown  by  its  being  translated  from  the  original  Latin  into  German  (1742), 
Italian  (1761),  French  (1773)  and  English  (1791),  and  by  its  constant  use  by 
the  best  students. 

Other  publications  until  1745  or  later  were  mostly  text-books  of  varying  de- 
gree, often  treating  of  the  practical  use  of  the  basso  continuo,  as  by  Friedrich 
Erhardt  Niedt  (d.  1717)  of  Jena  and  Copenhagen,  a larger  work  (3  parts, 
1700-17,  the  last  edited  by  Mattheson)  and  a smaller  one  (1708)  ; by  David 
Heinichen  (d.  1729),  from  1718  at  Dresden,  a considerable  treatise  (171 1,  much 
enlarged,  1728)  ; by  Mattheson  (d.1764),  the  versatile  Hamburg  critic  and 
composer,  several  practical  manuals,  largely  on  the  same  (1719-39),  the  most 
important  being  the  last,  Der  vollkotnmene  Capellmeister by  Buttstett  of 
Erfurt  (d.  1727),  advocating  the  old  hexachord  solmization  (1717) ; by 
Giovanni  Francesco  Beccatelli  (d.  c.  1734)?  choirmaster  at  Prato,  some  12 
essays  on  various  subjects  (from  1725),  mostly  dealing  with  special  points, 
with  some  historical  notes;  by  Pepusch  (d.  1752),  the  London  ballad-opera- 
writer,  a useful  text-book  on  old-fashioned  lines  (1731);  by  Francesco 
Antonio  Calegari  (d.  after  1740)  of  Padua  and  Venice,  a general  treatise,  one  of 
the  best  in  Italian  till  much  later  (MS.,  1732)  ; by  David  Kellner,  a German 
lutist  who  was  cantor  at  Stockholm,  on  figured  bass  (1732),  which,  though  not 
valuable,  was  often  republished  and  translated ; by  Lorenz  Christoph  Mizler 
(d.  1778),  one  of  Bach’s  pupils,  a student  and  later  lecturer  at  Leipsic  Univer- 


MUSICAL  LITERATURE 


327 


sity,  the  founder  in  1738  of  the  Society  of  Musical  Sciences  there,  and  from 
1743  a teacher  at  Warsaw,  a handbook  on  figured  bass  (1739)  aQd  some  others, 
with  a translation  of  Fux’  Gradus  (1742)  ; by  Johann  Daniel  Berlin  (d.  c.  1775), 
organist  at  Copenhagen  from  1730  and  at  Drontheim  from  1737,  an  instruction- 
book  in  Danish  (1742);  by  Geminiani  (d.  1762),  the  violinist,  practical 
directions  for  modulation  and  accompaniment  (1742-55)  ; by  Meinrad  Spiess 
(d.  1761),  prior  of  the  monastery  at  Irrsee,  a thoughtful,  but  execrably  written 
Tractatus  (1746);  and  by  Charles  Henri  Blainville  (d.  1769),  a ’cellist  and 
teacher  at  Paris,  a brief  text-book  (1746),  a plea  for  a third  or  ‘Hellenic1 
mode  (1751)  and  a so-called  Histoire  (1767),  which  is  mostly  on  theory. 

The  situation  in  theory  from  about  1745  onward  is  hard  to  put  briefly,  since 
lines  of  controversy  crossed  and  recrossed.  Rameau’s  system  was  becoming 
known  and  to  it  new  features  or  new  emphases  were  being  added.  The  chief 
contributors  to  the  literature,  besides  Rameau  himself,  were  Sorge  of  Lobenstein 
(d.  1778),  with  an  able  general  treatise  (1745-7)  and  several  later  works, 
usually  polemic ; Joseph  Riepel  (d.  1782),  a widely  traveled  musician,  from 
1751  working  at  Ratisbon,  with  a series  of  books  (1752-86,  the  last  edited  by 
Schubarth),  partly  on  counterpoint ; Jean  Adam  Serre  of  Geneva,  with  two 
acute  critiques  (1753,  ’63)  ; Friedrich  Wilhelm  Marpurg  (d.  1795),  a scholar 
of  superior  training,  from  1746  at  Paris  and  from  1763  lottery-superintendent 
at  Berlin,  whose  masterly  treatises  on  the  fugue  (1753-4)  and  on  general  com- 
position (1755-8),  with  other  works,  were  widely  influential  because  of  their 
excellent  style  and  forcible  thought;  Tartini  (d.  1770),  the  veteran  violinist 
of  Padua,  with  a notable  compendium  (1754)  that  strove  to  carry  further  the 
analysis  of  chords,  with  some  other  works  ; Johann  Friedrich  Daube  (d.  1797), 
successively  at  Stuttgart,  Augsburg  and  Vienna,  with  several  text-books  (from 
17 56)  ; Jakob  Adlung  (d.  1762),  in  1727  Buttstett’s  successor  at  Erfurt,  with 
two  thoughtful  works  (1758,  ’68)  ; and  Pietro  Gianotti  (d.  1 765),  a double-bass- 
ist at  the  Paris  Opera,  with  a redaction  of  Rameau’s  system  (1759).  Further 
writers  in  the  succession  will  be  noted  under  the  next  period  (see  sec.  165). 

More  or  less  connected  with  the  above  were  the  various  manuals  or  methods 
for  singers  and  players.  Thus  vocal  music  was  treated  by  Michel  L’Affilard  (d. 
after  i7i7),from  1683  in  the  French  Royal  Chapel,  on  sight-singing  (1691)  ; by 
Michel  Pignolet  de  Monteclair  (d.  1737)  of  the  Paris  Opdra  (1700)  ; by  Kaspar 
Calvor  of  Klausthal  (d.  1725),  on  church  music  (1702)  ; by  Martin  Heinrich 
Fuhrmann  (d.  after  1740),  cantor  at  Berlin,  two  text-books  (1706, ’15);  by 
Jean  Le  Beuf  (d.  1760),  abbe  at  Auxerre,  many  essays  on  Plain-Song  (from 
1725)  ; and  by  Marpurg  (d.  1795),  on  singing  (1763).  Methods  for  the  violin 
were  put  forth  by  Monteclair  (1711),  Geminiani  (d.  1762),  several  short  books 
(from  1740),  including  rules  for  guitarists  and  other  players,  and  Tartini 
(d.  1770),  brief  posthumous  essays  ; for  the  flute  (1752)  by  Quantz  of  Berlin 
(d.  1773),  including  accounts  of  his  improvements  in  the  instrument ; rambling 
writings  on  the  lute  (from  1727)  by  E.  G.  Baron  (d.  1760),  also  of  Berlin;  a 
valuable  compendium  of  the  various  instruments  of  the  day  (1732)  bv  Joseph 
Friedrich  Bernhardt  Kaspar  Majer,  cantor  at  Hall  (Wiirttemberg),  which  is  a 
historical  source  as  well;  and  for  the  clavier  (2  parts,  1750,  ’61)  by  Marpurg 
(d.  1795),  and  the  epoch-making  treatise  (1753-62  and  later  enlargements) 
by  K.  P.  E.  Bach  (d.  1788). 


328 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


Also  intimately  connected  with  theory  were  various  discursive  writings, 
often  controversial,  that  now  began  to  appear,  indicating  the  rise  of  true  criti- 
cism. 

Johann  Mattheson  of  Hamburg  (d.  1764)  was  much  the  most  prolific  writer 
of  this  class,  his  books  on  musical  topics  alone  aggregating  about  8000  pages. 
His  purpose  vibrated  between  the  didactic,  the  polemic,  the  critical  and  the 
historical.  His  works  on  theory  or  method  extended  through  20  years  (1719- 
39).  Of  the  rest,  the  first  was  Das  nen-eroffnete , Das  beschutzte , and  Das 
forschende  Orchester  (3  vols.,  1713,  ’17,  ’21,  over  1700  pp.),  treating  didactic- 
ally of  music  as  a part  of  elegant  culture,  satirizing  those  who  still  clung  to 
the  antiquated  scales  (especially  Buttstett),  and  discussing  problems  of  inter- 
vals. Then  came  the  Critica  musica  (1722-5,  748  pp.),  essays  in  part  re- 
printed or  translated  from  various  sources,  issued  periodically  (including  a 
diatribe  against  Handel’s  first  Passion),  and  Der  musicalische  Patriot  (1728, 
376  pp.),  a similar  publication,  issued  weekly  for  a short  time  (including  an 
account  of  the  Hamburg  opera).  To  the  new  interest  in  biography  he  con- 
tributed through  his  Ehren-Pforte  (1740,  475  pp.)  and  his  Life  of  Handel 
(1761).  His  vigorous  attacks  on  conventional  notions  did  good,  but  his 
judgment  was  not  infallible  and  his  method  often  spiteful,  while  his  pedantry 
and  prolixity  are  wearisome.  Mattheson’s  advocacy  of  dramatic  church 
cantatas  stirred  up  a strenuous  debate  between  Joachim  Meyer  (d.  1732)  of 
Gottingen  (1726-8)  and  Fuhrmann  (d.  after  1740)  of  Berlin  (1728-30),  the 
latter  on  Mattheson’s  side.  Mattheson’s  experiment  with  periodical  publica- 
tions was  imitated  by  Mizler  of  Leipsic  and  Warsaw  (d.  1778),  in  his  Biblio- 
thek  (monthly  at  intervals,  1736-54),  containing  much  valuable  matter,  often 
directed  against  Mattheson,  and  another  short-lived  venture  (1739-40)  ; and 
also  by  Johann  Adolf  Scheibe  (d.  1776),  from  1736  at  Hamburg,  in  his  Der 
critische  Musicus  (weekly,  1737-40,  enlarged  ed.  1745),  made  up  of  superficial 
and  often  bitter  original  articles  (as  an  attack  on  Bach’s  vocal  writing,  1 737), 
aiming  in  part  to  combat  the  growing  use  of  acoustics  in  theory. 

Friedrich  Wilhelm  Marpurg  (d.  1795)  was  a much  abler  critic  than  Matthe- 
son. His  Der  critische  Musicus  an  der  Spree  (weekly,  1749-50)  was  succeeded 
by  the  important  Historisch-critische  Beytrage  (at  intervals,  1754-62,  ’78), 
which,  besides  contributed  and  original  discussions,  included  notices  of  events 
and  persons,  with  some  careful  biographies.  His  Critische  Briefe  (weekly, 
1 759-63),  besides  similar  matter,  also  included  extensive  theoretical  essays. 

Other  critical  writers  of  varying  importance  were  Benedetto  Marcello 
(d.  1739),  the  sacred  composer,  with  an  attack  upon  Lotti  as  a madrigalist 
(1705)  and  a satire  on  the  Italian  opera  (1720  ?),  besides  a MS.  work  on 
theory  (1707);  J.  J.  Rousseau  (d.  1778),  always  too  ready  with  his  pen, 
with  articles  and  pamphlets  (1743-54);  Charles  Avison  (d.  1770),  organist 
at  Newcastle,  with  an  Essay  on  Musical  Expression  (1752),  which  William 
Hayes  (d.  1777),  professor  at  Oxford,  criticised  (1753);  Christian  Gottfried 
Krause  (d.  1770),  a Berlin  lawyer,  with  good  discussions  of  lyric  poetry  (1753) 
and  other  essays;  Colin  de  Blamont  (d.  1760),  superintendent  at  Versailles, 
with  an  essay  on  French  opera-texts  (1754)  ; and  Francesco  Algarotti  (d.  1764), 
an  erudite  Italian,  from  1739  under  the  patronage  of  Frederick  the  Great  at 
Rheinsberg  and  Berlin,  with  a notable  book  on  the  opera  (1755). 


MUSICAL  LITERATURE 


329 


The  making  of  dictionaries  was  now  taken  up  by  several  hands,  as  by 
Thomas  Balthasar  Janowka,  organist  at  Prague,  with  his  Clavis  ad  thesaurum 
(1701,  324  pp.),  containing  terms  only  ; by  Sebastien  de  Brossard  (d.  1730),  a 
musical  priest,  from  1687  at  Strassburg  and  from  1698  at  Meaux,  with  a Dic- 
tionnaire  (1703,  300  pp.),  terms  only;  by  J.  G.  Walther  (d.  1748),  the  Weimar 
organist,  with  a Lexicon  (1728-32,  659  pp.),  including  biographies,  terms  and 
bibliography;  by  an  unknown  editor  (possibly  the  publishers  C.  and  J . D. 
Stossel  of  Chemnitz),  a Lexicon  (1737,  430  pp  ),  names,  terms,  history,  etc.; 
and  by  Rousseau  (d.  1778),  with  a Dictionnaire  (1768,  548  pp.),  being  his 
articles  in  the  Encyclopedic  revised  and  increased. 

In  the  field  of  history  only  minor  works  are  to  be  noted.  Nominally  com- 
prehensive, but  really  fragmentary,  were  those  of  Jacques  Bonnet  (d.  c.  1724), 
using  material  by  Pierre  Bourdelot  (d.  1685),  both  of  Paris,  (1715,  increased 
to  4 vols.,  1721);  and  of  Philippe  Joseph  Caffiaux  (d.  1777),  also  of  Paris 
(MS.,  1754).  On  ancient  music  there  are  valuable  data  in  the  bibliographical 
collections  (1705-34)  by  Johann  Albert  Fabricius  (d.  1736)  of  Hamburg;  in 
essays  (from  1705)  by  Pierre  Jean  Burette  (d.  1747),  professor  at  the  Uni- 
versity of  Paris ; in  many  dissertations  on  Hebrew  music  by  various  authors, 
collected  (1744-69)  by  Blasio  Ugolini  of  Venice;  in  an  essay  on  the  Greek 
genera  (1746)  by  Pepusch  (d.  1752);  and  in  one  of  the  works  (1759)  of 
Marpurg  (d.  1795).  Andrea  Adami  da  Bolsena  (d.  1742)  wrote  on  the 
methods  of  the  Papal  Chapel  (1711)  ; Pierre  Francois  Godard  de  Beauchamps 
(d.  1761),  two  works  on  the  French  theatre  and  opera  (1735,  ’46)  ; Francesco 
Saverio  Quadrio  (d.  1756)  on  poetry,  including  the  opera  and  oratorio 
0738-59);  Bonnet  on  dancing  (1723);  Jean  Georges  Noverre  (d.  1810)  on 
the  same  (1760)  ; John  Parry  (d.  1782),  a blind  Welsh  harper,  made  collec- 
tions, with  notes,  of  British,  Welsh  and  Scottish  songs  (1742-81)  ; and  Scheibe 
(d.  1774)  contended  for  the  origin  of  harmonized  song  among  Northern 
peoples  (1754). 

The  famous  firm  of  Breitkopf  & Hartel  in  Leipsic  (see  sec.  193)  was  started 
in  1719  by  Bernhard  Christoph  Breitkopf  (d.  1 777)  as  a general  printing  busi- 
ness, which  undertook  music-printing  also  from  1754  by  the  aid  of  new  meth- 
ods of  making  type  invented  by  his  son,  J.  G.  Immanuel  Breitkopf  (d.  1794), 
whose  scholarship  brought  forth  several  books  on  printing  (from  1779).  Gott- 
fried Christian  Hartel  (d.  1827)  did  not  enter  the  business  till  1795.  It 
may  be  noted  that  Pierre  Simon  Fournier  of  Paris  (d.  1768)  introduced 
round-headed  notes  into  music-type  in  1756,  later  issuing  a history  of  music- 
type  (1765). 

142.  Summary  of  the  Half-Century.  — The  early  18th  century, 
taken  as  a whole,  presents  many  of  the  contradictory  features 
of  a transitional  epoch.  Even  more  than  the  17th  century,  it 
was  the  meeting-point  of  tendencies  old  and  new,  so  that  it  was 
characterized  by  qualities  that  were  intricately  mixed.  A just 
summary  must  try  to  take  account  of  all  of  these. 

On  the  whole,  the  greatest  feature  of  the  age  was  the  second 


330 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


culmination  of  the  polyphonic  idea  of  composition  which  had 
begun  in  the  Netherlands  in  the  14th  and  15th  centuries,  had 
come  to  a first  culmination  in  the  Italian  a cappella  style  of  the 
late  1 6th  century,  and  had  then  gathered  itself  for  a new  and 
vigorous  growth  in  the  German  organ  schools  of  the  17th  century. 
This  majestic  evolution  now  reached  an  unapproachable  height 
in  the  comprehensive  and  unique  genius  of  Bach.  Its  influence 
told  mightily  upon  most  of  the  German  composers  of  the  period, 
bringing  forth  numerous  works  in  strict  style  and  affecting  the 
treatment  of  all  sorts  of  other  works.  Its  applications  were  on 
the  whole  more  instrumental  than  vocal,  thus  supplying  the 
counterpart  to  the  earlier  climax  before  1700,  but  the  advance 
of  the  contrapuntal  chorus  under  Bach,  Handel  and  others  is 
significant,  since  it  made  vocal  polyphony  parallel  in  breadth 
and  vigor  of  expression  to  that  of  both  the  organ  and  the 
orchestra.  The  facility  displayed  has  remained  a model  and  an 
inspiration  for  all  later  periods. 

Meanwhile  the  expansion  of  dramatic  music  continued,  with  its 
distinctly  unpolyphonic  methods  and  its  appeal  to  the  popular 
taste  for  enjoyment  and  excitement.  The  vogue  of  the  opera 
in  all  countries  was  not  at  once  productive  of  works  of  enduring 
value,  for  reasons  to  be  noticed  in  a moment,  but  it  was  useful 
in  making  the  art  of  music  a still  more  extensive  popular  power, 
in  forcing  composers  to  study  persistently  the  ways  and  means  of 
tonal  effect,  and  in  stimulating  vocal  and  orchestral  technique. 
It  kept  to  the  fore  questions  about  vocal  melody,  about  articu- 
lated harmonic  and  rhythmic  accompaniment  and  about  instru- 
mental color.  As  dramatic  music  came  to  include  the  more 
elastic  type  of  the  opera  buffa  and  as  it  gave  birth  to  the  Han- 
delian  oratorio,  it  gave  tokens  of  a new  vitality  that  was  to 
rejoice  many  later  generations. 

Side  by  side  with  these  movements  and  influenced  by  both, 
the  advance  of  chamber  music  went  on,  calling  to  its  aid  the 
latest  improvements  in  the  members  of  the  violin  group,  stimu- 
lating the  betterment  of  other  solo  instruments,  especially  of  the 
wood-wind  class,  and  of  keyboard  instruments,  especially  the 
harpsichord  and  the  immature  piano,  and  differentiating  the 
virtuoso  as  a new  variety  of  musician.  This  type  of  com- 
position had  behind  it  no  extensive  traditions,  but  its  progress 
in  this  period  was  notably  rapid.  The  vigor  of  a few  masters, 


SUMMARY  OF  THE  HALF-CENTURY 


331 


of  whom  Bach  was  easily  chief,  sufficed  to  push  it  toward  ma- 
turity, outlining  for  it  forms  and  principles  that  needed  but  little 
to  make  them  permanently  satisfactory.  The  freedom  of  this 
whole  type  of  music  made  it  peculiarly  attractive.  Into  it  might 
go  the  exactest  contrapuntal  learning,  the  extreme  of  concer- 
tistic  spirit  and  brilliance,  and  any  degree  of  personal  imagina- 
tion and  ingenuity  besides.  While  the  tendency  of  the  age  to 
formality  held  it  back  for  a time,  its  accomplishments  presaged 
the  later  glory  of  the  piano  and  the  orchestra  as  vehicles  for 
monumental  expression. 

But  the  1 8th  century  in  all  its  activities  drifted  toward  formal- 
ism and  mannerism.  This  was  apparent  in  its  literature,  its 
philosophy  and  its  ethics,  and  was  bound  to  affect  its  art.  By 
the  middle  of  the  century  all  musical  art  showed  tendencies 
toward  routine  conventions  of  various  sorts.  Thus  much  poly- 
phonic writing  became  to  a surprising  degree  a knack  or  trick, 
as  it  had  been  in  the  time  of  Okeghem  at  the  opening  of  the 
1 6th  century.  Thus  even  the  opera  became  for  too  many  writers 
a matter  of  rule  and  formula,  manneristic  and  mechanical.  Thus 
there  was  a constant  search  for  regular  ways  of  writing  instru- 
mental music  that  could  be  applied  without  inspiration  or  real 
invention.  The  greater  geniuses,  who  mostly  escaped  these 
tendencies,  were  outnumbered  and  often  hidden  by  the  host  of 
lesser  workers  who  conceived  of  their  art  as  mere  artisans. 
Hence  the  scornful  epithets  ‘ pigtail  music  ’ and  ‘ capellmeister 
music’  that  are  often  given  to  much  18th-century  composition. 
It  was  the  prevalence  of  this  superficiality  and  heartlessness 
that  constituted  the  call  and  the  opportunity  for  the  great  mas- 
ters of  the  next  two  periods. 

In  the  domain  of  theory  and  criticism  the  period  was  signifi- 
cant for  the  opening  up  of  several  new  lines  of  thought.  For 
the  first  time  harmony  begins  to  get  down  to  basal  physical 
principles,  and  thus  to  take  on  the  aspect  of  a true  science.  It 
was  really  not  until  this  time  that  harmonic  coherence  and  drift 
began  to  be  controlling  influences  in  the  lay-out  of  extended 
works,  thus  bringing  actually  to  bear  the  innovations  begun  in 
the  1 6th  century.  And  the  whole  literary  side  of  musicianship 
now  begins  to  be  cultivated,  though  without  much  system,  with 
considerable  oddity  and  partisan  bias,  and  so  without  producing 
works  of  permanent  influence.  But  the  mere  fact  that  writers 


332 


THE  EARLY  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


were  active  in  discussing  questions  of  acoustics,  of  structure, 
and  of  artistic  value,  is  significant. 

Throughout  the  century  the  social  status  of  music  as  an  art  left 
much  to  be  desired.  As  a rule,  musicians,  unless  attached  to 
the  church  or  employed  in  the  opera,  were  forced  to  occupy  a 
menial  relation  to  some  titled  patron.  But  the  rise  of  instru- 
mental music  turned  attention  to  the  public  concert  as  a 
frequent  social  event,  gave  employment  and  stimulus  to  the 
independent  virtuoso,  and  ultimately  led  to  the  organization  of 
fixed  orchestras.  Gradually  these  changes  wrought  a change  in 
the  character  of  music  as  a calling  or  profession.  They  also 
tended  to  lift  musical  art  to  a place  of  greater  dignity  in  popu- 
lar estimation.  To  these  results  every  extension  of  the  literary 
and  scientific  discussion  of  musical  subjects  through  publication 
was  a distinct  contribution. 


PART  VI 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


PART  VI 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 

Chap.  XIX.  Haydn.  The  Sonata  and  the  Orchestra. 

143.  General  Survey. 

144.  Haydn. 

145.  His  Works  and  Style. 

146.  The  Classical  Sonata  and  Symphony. 

147.  The  Perfected  Orchestra. 

148.  The  Early  Symphonists. 

149.  Instrumental  Virtuosi. 

Chap.  XX.  Gluck  and  the  Dramatic  Reform. 

1 50.  The  Operatic  Situation. 

15 1.  The  Later  Neapolitans. 

152.  Gluck  as  a Reformer. 

153.  The  Purpose  of  his  Innovations. 

154.  His  Immediate  Contemporaries. 

1 5 5.  Operatic  Progress  in  France. 

Chap.  XXI.  Mozart  and  the  Exaltation  of  Melody. 

156.  Mozart’s  Unique  Position. 

157.  His  Style  in  General. 

1 58.  The  Singspiel  and  the  Artistic  Song. 

159.  Secular  Music  in  England. 

Chap.  XXII.  The  Rise  of  Pianism.  Sacred  Music. 

160.  The  Improved  Piano. 

1 61.  The  Vienna  Pianists. 

162.  The  dementi  School. 

163.  Catholic  Church  Music. 

164.  Protestant  Church  Music. 

Chap.  XXIII.  Theoretical  and  Literary  Progress. 

165.  Literature  about  Music. 

166.  Summary  of  the  Half-Century. 


334 


CHAPTER  XIX 


HAYDN.  THE  SONATA  AND  THE  ORCHESTRA 

143.  General  Survey. — The  half-century  following  1750 
proved  to  be  in  several  ways  extremely  important  in  music- 
history,  but  we  look  in  vain  for  much  evident  connection  be- 
tween its  events  and  those  of  general  history,  or  rather,  to  put  it 
more  exactly,  the  conditions  of  the  time  affected  music  most  on 
its  lower  and  commonplace  level,  which  was  not  the  plane  upon 
which  vigorous  and  constructive  geniuses  were  at  work.  The 
latter  were  the  agents  that  made  the  period  memorable,  simply 
because  they  rose  so  much  above  their  fellows. 

The  world  of  politics  was  full  of  turmoil,  but  with  little  effect  upon  musi- 
cal art  except  to  subject  its  exercise  to  local  and  temporary  interruptions, 
as,  for  example,  in  parts  of  Germany  and  Austria  during  the  exhausting 
Seven  Years’  War  (1756-63),  and  at  Paris  at  the  time  of  the  Revolution 
(1789-95).  The  effects  of  the  latter  upon  art  in  general,  as  of  the  com- 
plications connected  with  the  achievement  of  American  Independence 
(1761-83),  were  naturally  not  apparent  until  after  1800. 

The  long  reigns  were  those  of  Louis  XV.  of  France  (1715-74),  Maria 
Theresa  of  Austria  (1740-80),  Frederick  the  Great  of  Prussia  (1740-86), 
George  III.  of  England  (1760-1820),  Catharine  II.  of  Russia  (1762-96), 
and  Louis  XVI.  of  France  (1774-92).  The  remarkable  figure  of  Napo- 
leon appeared  in  1795,  but  his  accession  as  emperor  did  not  come  till 
1804. 

The  time  was  one  of  controversy  and  criticism  in  the  world  of  thought, 
with  a tendency  to  negations  rather  than  construction.  Morals  and  man- 
ners were  artificial,  and  religion  tended  to  lapse  into  deism  or  atheism. 
The  average  pessimism  was  relieved  only  by  the  display  of  ideality  or  of 
practical  efficiency  on  the  part  of  individuals.  Altogether,  the  period  was 
not  one  that  might  be  supposed  favorable  for  important  artistic  advance. 
Yet,  on  the  other  hand,  it  was  precisely  here  that  the  truly  modern  spirit 
took  its  rise,  breaking  away  from  outgrown  formulae,  throwing  off  restraints, 
and  catching  sight  of  far-off  goals. 

Briefly  summarized,  the  chief  movements  of  the  period  in 
music  were  these  — the  establishment  of  the  principles  of  what 
is  now  called  ‘ classical  * form  by  a group  of  masters  of  whom 
Haydn  and  Mozart  are  typical  examples ; the  reformation  of 

335 


336 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


the  manneristic  Italian  opera  upon  new  and  much  nobler  lines 
of  development,  in  which  Gluck  was  the  pioneer ; a rising  inter- 
est in  the  song  as  an  art-form  of  importance,  and  the  reappear- 
ance of  the  singspiel;  the  recognition  of  the  piano  as  the  keyboard 
instrument  par  excellence , with  advances  in  virtuosity  upon  it 
and  in  methods  of  instruction  for  it ; the  definition  of  the  orches- 
tra in  its  modern  form,  and  of  standard  groups  for  chamber 
music ; and  a steady  progress  in  theory,  with  the  disappearance 
of  most  of  the  remnants  of  the  old  ideas  and  the  complete  su- 
premacy of  modern  tonality.  As  the  period  merges  in  the  next 
are  seen  the  beginnings  of  the  famous  contrast  between  the 
‘ classical’  and  the  ‘romantic  ’ spirits  in  composition,  with  the  con- 
sequent tokens  of  a coming  revolt  from  mere  regularity  of  out- 
ward form  in  favor  of  greater  truth  and  variety  of  subjective 
expression. 

144.  Haydn. — By  a curious  coincidence,  during  the  last  months 
of  Bach’s  life  at  Leipsic  in  1750  a young  musician  at  Vienna,  as 
he  faced  the  problem  of  his  future  career  and  sought  to  lay 
foundations  for  it  by  methodical  private  study,  was  fitting  him- 
self to  become  the  next  great  leader  in  the  musical  world.  This 
was  Haydn,  a poor  peasant  boy,  just  discharged  from  the  choir 
of  St.  Stephen’s  and  searching  eagerly  for  musical  opportunity. 
It  was  still  some  years  before  the  opening  came,  but,  when  it  did, 
he  stepped  into  a place  of  singular  influence,  which  he  occupied 
for  the  whole  later  half  of  the  century.  His  genius  was  strik- 
ingly different  from  Bach’s  and  his  special  contribution  to  prog- 
ress at  first  sight  utterly  diverse.  Yet  between  the  two  there 
was  a real  bond  of  connection,  and  the  work  of  the  later  master 
was  a real  supplement  to  that  of  the  earlier.  And  Haydn  had 
what  Bach  lacked,  a vital  hold  upon  the  admiration  and  follow- 
ing of  the  rank  and  file  of  musicians  in  his  own  day,  so  that 
what  he  did  had  an  immediate  effect  upon  standards  of  style. 
To  him  belongs  the  honor  of  fixing  a type  of  instrumental  compo- 
sition that  not  only  became  characteristic  of  the  period,  but  is  still 
decidedly  influential.  He  also  was  helpful  in  settling  the  form 
of  the  modern  orchestra  as  the  crowning  implement  of  musical 
expression.  The  circumstances  of  his  mature  life  were  favorable 
to  his  orderly  development  and  to  the  production  of  a noble  list 
of  works,  for  which  he  is  still  held  in  affectionate  regard. 


HAYDN 


337 


Joseph  Haydn  (d.  1809),  born  in  1732  at  Rohrau,  a village  not  far  from 
Vienna  on  the  Hungarian  border,  was  a wagon-maker’s  son,  the  second  of 
twelve  children.  His  parents  were  simple  folk,  industrious,  upright  and 
devout  (Catholics).  From  his  father  he  derived  a taste  for  rustic  music, 
from  his  mother  practical  habits  of 
order  and  thoroughness.  Evincing 
early  a passion  for  music,  when  6 years 
old  he  was  sent  to  the  near-by  town 
of  Hainburg  to  study  with  a musical 
relative,  J.  M.  Frankh,  a good  but 
severe  master.  Here  in  1740  he  was 
discovered  by  Reutter,  the  Viennese 
organist,  and  taken  into  the  choir  of 
St.  Stephen’s,  where  for  9 years  he 
had  constant  practice  in  singing,  both 
at  the  cathedral  and  often  at  the  court, 
with  free  support  and  instruction  of 
a sort  at  the  choir-school.  He  supple- 
mented the  meagre  school  training  by 
much  independent  study.  In  1745  his 
brother  Michael  came  into  the  choir 
and,  when  the  elder  boy’s  voice  broke, 
succeeded  him  as  chief  soloist.  In 
November,  1749,  Joseph  was  abruptly  dismissed  and  literally  turned  out  into 
the  city  streets.  Kept  from  starving  by  a few  kind  friends,  he  began  to  secure 
some  means  of  self-support.  He  drilled  himself  assiduously  in  playing  the 
clavichord  and  the  violin  and  in  composition,  using  at  first  a set  of  six  sonatas 
by  K.  P.  E.  Bach  as  models.  In  1751  he  wrote  his  first  mass,  in  1752  a comic 
opera  (music  now  lost),  and  in  1755  his  first  quartet.  He  learned  to  know 
Metastasio  the  poet,  Porpora  the  singing-master  and  composer  (whom  he 
served  as  valet  in  return  for  instruction),  Gluck  the  opera-writer,  and  Ditters- 
dorf  the  young  violinist.  Some  teaching  and  irregular  work  as  a player 
brought  money  for  music  and  theoretical  books,  and  the  process  of  tireless 
self-discipline  went  on.  Among  his  early  patrons  were  the  amateur  Von 
Fiirnberg,  for  whom  he  wrote  18  quartets,  the  cultivated  Countess  Thun,  who 
became  his  pupil,  and  in  1759  Count  Morzin  of  Bohemia,  who  made  him  his 
choirmaster.  Here  he  had  a good  orchestra,  for  which  in  1759  he  wrote  his 
first  symphony.  At  this  juncture  (1760)  he  married  a wig-maker’s  daughter, 
whose  extravagance  and  bad  temper  caused  him  infinite  irritation  for  40  years. 

His  powers  as  composer  and  conductor  being  now  matured,  in  1761  he  be- 
came assistant  choirmaster  to  Prince  Paul  Esterhazy,  the  head  of  a family  long 
famous  for  wealth,  culture  and  musical  enthusiasm.  At  his  country-seat  at 
Eisenstadt  the  Prince  maintained  a small  but  choice  musical  establishment. 
In  1762  Prince  Nicholas  (‘  the  Magnificent’)  succeeded  his  brother  and 
greatly  improved  the  musical  forces,  of  which  Haydn  became  director  in  1766. 
Soon  after  this  the  Prince  built  a new  palace  at  Esterh&z,  whose  furnishings 
and  surroundings  were  so  superb  that  it  was  called  ‘the  second  Versailles.’ 
Here  till  the  death  of  the  Prince  in  1790  Haydn  lived  and  worked.  For  the 
z 


338 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


daily  routine  of  family  concerts,  services  in  the  palace  chapel,  and  performances 
in  the  private  theatre  he  had  a first-rate  orchestra  and  good  singers.  The 
Prince  was  cordial,  generous  and  scholarly,  and  his  demand  for  new  music 
was  incessant.  Here  Haydn  wrote  most  of  his  orchestral  and  chamber  works, 
his  clavier-pieces,  his  songs  and  operettas,  his  masses  and  other  church  music 
(excepting  works  mentioned  below).  His  many  gifts  were  called  into  constant 
activity  under  extremely  favorable  conditions.  The  drawbacks  were  the  dis- 
tance from  musical  centres,  the  lack  of  absence-leaves,  and  the  consequent 
monotony  of  stimulus  to  which  he  was  subjected.  Yet  his  development  was 
happy,  independent  and  symmetrical.  He  was  idolized  by  his  musicians  and 
his  fame  spread  far  and  wide.  Occasionally  the  establishment  was  taken  to 
Vienna  and  other  cities  for  performances,  but  none  of  these  trips  went  beyond 
the  limits  of  Hungary  and  Austria.  While  the  imperial  court  circle  affected  to 
disdain  his  style,  the  publication  of  many  of  his  works  by  Artaria  of  Vienna, 
Forster  of  London,  and  many  others,  brought  him  recognition  from  a distance, 
even  from  Italy,  France  and  Spain.  Numerous  musicians  sought  him  out,  and 
in  particular  his  relations  with  the  much  younger  Mozart  were  most  cordial. 

In  1790,  Prince  Nicholas  having  died,  Haydn  accepted  an  invitation  from 
Salomon  the  violinist  to  visit  London  and  give  a series  of  concerts.  Though 
almost  60  years  old,  this  was  his  first  considerable  journey.  Arriving  in  Eng- 
land in  January,  1791,  he  was  welcomed  with  universal  enthusiasm.  At  his 
concerts  and  otherwise  a long  list  of  his  works  was  given,  including  6 new 
symphonies  — all  with  enormous  success.  He  was  overwhelmed  with  atten- 
tions, professional  and  social,  was  made  Mus.D.  by  Oxford,  was  received  by 
royalty,  and  generally  lionized.  In  July,  1792,  he  returned  to  Vienna,  where 
he  was  now  exalted,  and  spent  a year  and  a half,  among  other  things  giving 
lessons  to  the  young  Beethoven.  Early  in  1 794  he  again  journeyed  to  London, 
where  his  reception  was  as  hearty  as  before,  giving  many  concerts  and  adding 
6 more  symphonies  to  his  English  series.  Late  in  1795  he  was  again  in  Vienna. 
His  connection  with  the  Esterhazys  continued  and  he  served  occasionally  as 
composer  at  Eisenstadt.  In  1797  he  wrote  his  Emperor's  Hymti,  now  the 
national  hymn  of  Austria.  In  London  he  had  been  deeply  impressed  by  hear- 
ing much  of  Handel’s  oratorio  music,  and  finally  undertook  The  Creation 
(words  from  the  Bible  and  from  Milton),  which  was  first  given  at  Vienna  in 
1798  and  rapidly  taken  up  elsewhere.  This  was  followed  by  The  Seasons 
(words  by  Thomson),  which  for  a time  was  almost  equally  successful.  The 
last  ten  years  were  uneventful,  as  his  strength  failed  and  his  productivity  al- 
most ceased.  He  was  much  sought  after  by  musicians  and  tenderly  cared  for 
by  admirers.  The  occupation  of  Vienna  by  the  French  in  1805  and  1809  dis- 
tressed him  greatly,  and  during  the  second  he  died  of  old  age.  He  was  buried 
at  Vienna,  but  in  1820  his  remains  were  transferred  to  the  Esterhazy  estate  at 
Eisenstadt,  whence  they  have  recently  been  removed  again  to  Vienna. 

Haydn’s  personality  was  singularly  sunny  and  lovable.  He  was  simple- 
hearted,  generous,  painstaking,  indefatigably  industrious,  almost  finically  pre- 
cise, a devout  Catholic,  honorable  and  manly.  His  music  he  regarded  as  a 
divine  gift.  His  own  powers  had  been  developed  by  exacting  labor,  and  he 
demanded  similar  fidelity  from  his  assistants.  The  reverence  he  inspired  is 
shown  by  the  sobriquet  ‘Papa’  generally  given  him  during  his  later  years. 


HAYDN 


339 


He  left  a considerable  property,  carefully  bequeathed  to  relatives  and  the  many 
persons  who  had  shown  him  kindness. 

145.  His  Works  and  Style.  — Haydn  was  first  of  all  an  in- 
strumental composer,  primarily  for  the  chamber  or  orchestral 
ensemble.  His  style  was  matured  in  this  field,  as  Bach’s  was  in 
that  of  the  organ.  It  is  his  achieve- 
ments here  that  have  given  him  his 
place  in  history.  Yet  he  was  also  an 
accomplished  writer  of  vocal  music,  in- 
cluding masses,  oratorios,  operas  and 
songs.  In  addition  he  contributed  wor- 
thily to  clavier  literature.  The  total 
number  of  his  works  must  be  over  1000 
(depending  on  how  the  count  is  made), 
of  which  fully  two-thirds  are  instrumen- 
tal. The  one  prominent  field  that  he 
did  not  enter  was  that  of  organ  music, 
and,  as  will  be  seen,  his  predilections 
led  him  away  from  certain  customary 
methods  in  several  of  the  fields  he  did 
cultivate.  So  far  as  his  experience  and 
opportunities  went,  he  compassed  the 
whole  range  of  musical  effort,  but  his 
position  as  an  Austrian,  with  his  isola- 
tion until  past  middle  life,  kept  him 
from  feeling  various  strong  influences 
that  were  at  work  elsewhere. 

Without  attempting  an  exhaustive  sum- 
mary, the  following  statistics  are  useful. 

Among  his  nearly  700  instrumental  works 
are  125  symphonies  (for  an  orchestra  vary- 
ing in  size  from  strings  with  2 oboes  and  2 
horns  up  to  the  full  band,  including  clari- 
nets), 30  trios,  77  quartets,  about  100  pieces 
for  various  chamber  combinations,  31  con- 
certos for  sundry  solo  instruments,  175  solos 
for  baryton  (Prince  Esterhazy’s  favorite  in- 
strument), about  50  sonatas  and  sinvlar 
works  for  clavier  alone,  and  as  many  for 
clavier  with  other  instruments.  Of  these, 
many  of  the  symphonies,  with  the  trios  and 
quartets,  are  the  most  important.  (A  number  of  the  symphonies  are 


Fig.  87.  — Baryton  or  Viola 
di  bordone,  having  sympa- 
thetic strings  like  the  viola 
d'amore. 


340 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


known  by  special  names.)  His  vocal  works  include  14  masses  and 
over  30  motets  and  other  church  pieces,  the  largest  of  which  is  The 
Seven  Words  (1785),  written  for  the  Cathedral  of  Cadiz,  at  first  as  an  or- 
chestral work,  3 oratorios,  chief  of  which  are  The  Creation  (1798)  and 
The  Seasons  (1801),  several  cantatas,  13  operas  in  Italian  (from  1769), 
including  Li  isola  disabitata  (1779)  and  Orlando paladino  (1782),  several 
operettas,  etc.,  and  a large  number  of  songs,  part-songs,  etc. 

Haydn’s  entire  style  proceeds  from  the  homophonic  and  har- 
monic point  of  view  rather  than  the  contrapuntal.  Here  he 
followed  Emanuel  Bach  instead  of  the  elder  Bach.  This  was 
due  partly  to  his  nationality  and  early  circumstances,  and  partly 
to  his  instinct  as  to  the  trend  of  musical  progress.  He  was  by 
no  means  lacking  in  contrapuntal  power,  as  his  choral  works 
and  the  details  of  many  other  works  attest,  but  his  artistic 
interest  lay  in  other  directions.  He  was  conspicuously  a 
melodist,  and  his  mind  was  saturated  with  the  forms  and 
spirit  of  folk-music.  His  gifts  on  this  side  involved  not  only 
a keen  appreciation  of  beautiful  tone-figures,  but  a strong  sense 
of  the  sweeping  harmonic  drifts  and  balanced  form  that  underlie 
them.  His  harmony  is  not  so  much  the  consequent  of  voice- 
part  texture  as  a dominating  plan  or  scheme  from  which  the  part- 
writing is  developed.  And  his  clarity  and  precision  of  form  are 
so  conspicuous  as  to  seem  to-day  almost  excessive.  His  works 
have  a crystalline  sharpness,  every  melodic  outline,  every  har- 
monic mass  or  progression  and  every  element  of  internal  struc- 
ture being  presented  with  absolute  distinctness.  But  his  love  of 
exactitude  and  perspicuity  is  kept  from  mechanicalness  by  the 
pervading  healthiness,  animation  and  humor  of  his  imagination, 
and  by  his  fine  sense  of  large  total  effects  and  of  the  color-contrasts 
essential  to  them.  His  method  emphasized  the  objective  side 
of  composition,  but  it  could  not  conceal  the  warmth  and  elevation 
of  his  personality.  Technically,  his  works  marked  an  epoch  in 
instrumental  style,  but  they  never  would  have  done  so  if  they 
had  not  been  the  vehicle  through  which  a really  artistic  nature 
expressed  itself. 

The  conspicuous  achievements  of  Haydn  were  two  — the  full  definition 
of  ‘ sonata-form 1 as  the  basis  for  a variety  of  extended  works  for  key- 
board, chamber  groups  and  orchestra,  and  the  settling  of  instrumentation 
upon  better  principles  than  had  hitherto  obtained.  Each  of  these 
requires  separate  treatment,  because  they  became  characteristic  of  the 
half-century  as  a whole  (see  secs.  146-147). 


THE  SONATA  AND  SYMPHONY 


34 


As  a vocal  composer  Haydn  was  not  so  striking,  though  his  works  were 
neither  few  nor  without  merit.  His  operas  were  tuneful  and  entertaining, 
but  his  dramatic  power  was  slight  and  his  conception  of  the  form  (as  he 
well  knew)  was  limited.  Of  his  oratorios  The  Creation  was  much  the 
best,  overflowing  with  naive  and  sincere  feeling.  His  masses  are  unequal, 
some  being  thoughtful,  some  showy,  but  as  a rule  they  represent  a view 
of  sacred  music  too  external  and  even  theatric  to  be  typical.  This  re- 
mark applies  in  some  degree  even  to  his  serious  Seven  Words.  In  his 
songs  he  shows  affinity  with  the  movement  toward  lyric  expression  in 
small  forms  that  at  length  became  one  of  the  valuable  legacies  of  the  1 8th 
century  to  the  early  19th,  though  in  his  case  the  tendency  to  nicety  of 
form  overweighted  his  spontaneity. 

146.  The  Classical  Sonata  and  Symphony.  — Haydn  can  hardly 
be  called  the  inventor  of  anything  absolutely  new  in  musical 
usage,  but  to  him  belongs  the  honor  of  so  combining  various 
points  in  procedure  and  so  exemplifying  them  in  masterly  works 
that  they  became  norms  for  a considerable  period  and,  indeed, 
are  still  recognized  as  superior.  This  service  of  his  concerned 
both  the  plan  of  movements  in  extended  works  and  the  par- 
ticular form  of  each  of  them.  The  use  of  movements  had  been 
common  for  a full  century,  but  the  exaltation  of  one  particular 
order  as  standard  was  a fresh  step.  Composition  had  long  been 
tending  toward  homophonic  and  harmonic  ways  of  conceiving 
and  handling  materials,  but  not  until  now  were  these  made 
unquestionably  supreme.  The  treatment  of  the  first  and  last 
movements  had  been  approximating  its  final  stage  of  develop- 
ment, but  essential  points  had  usually  been  lacking  that  were 
now  regularly  supplied.  All  through  the  17th  century  the 
‘ sonata  ’ had  been  properly  a form  for  a solo  instrument,  and 
the  transfer  of  such  forms  to  the  keyboard  or  to  a concerted 
group  had  been  becoming  frequent  since  1700,  but  henceforth 
this  concerted  use  became  typical.  In  this  advance,  so  signifi- 
cant for  modern  style,  the  influence  of  Haydn  was  immediately 
reinforced  by  that  of  Mozart,  Beethoven  and  others  of  the  Vien- 
nese group. 

Without  trying  to  trace  the  growth  of  practice  in  full,  the  broad  out- 
lines should  be  stated  of  the  general  plan  and  specific  form,  as  ultimately 
established  not  only  for  the  keyboard  works  known  as  sonatas  proper, 
but  for  trios,  quartets,  symphonies  and  even  concertos.  For  all  these  the 
same  general  principles  of  structure  became  in  Haydn’s  time  standard. 
His  personal  influence  was  exercised  more  in  chamber  or  orchestral  works 
than  in  those  for  the  keyboard. 


342 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


SONATA-FORM 


343 


The  1 classical 1 plan  of  movements  included  either  three  or  four  — the 
latter  number  being  the  more  common  in  quartets  and  symphonies.  Of 
these  the  first  and  the  last  were  the  longer  and  more  essential.  The  first 
is  properly  in  ‘ sonata-form  1 and  the  last  either  in  that  or  in  ‘ rondo-form,’ 
and  both  are  brisk  in  tempo,  the  last  often  a presto.  The  second,  in  slow 
tempo,  is  either  in  ‘ song-form  ’ or  at  least  eminently  lyrical,  and  the  third, 
if  there  are  four,  is  properly  a sprightly  or  even  humorous  minuet.  The 
keys  of  the  first  and  last  movements  are  the  same,  of  course,  but  those 
of  the  others  may  vary. 

‘ Sonata-form  1 as  a type  of  structure  within  a movement  involves  the 
familiar  three  divisions  of  exposition,  development  and  recapitulation  (see 
sec.  137),  but,  as  understood  in  the  ‘classical 1 period,  it  also  involves  the 
principle  that  in  the  exposition  there  shall  be  either  two  distinct  * subjects,’ 
the  one  in  the  tonic,  the  other  in  the  dominant  or  (if  the  tonic  is  minor) 
in  the  relative  major,  or  the  same  subject  presented  in  the  two  keys 
successively.  Haydn’s  practice  was  not  consistent  in  requiring  two 
different  subjects.  Ultimately  the  second  subject  was  usually  of  a flowing, 
song-like  character,  contrasted  with  the  more  incisive  and  brilliant  first 
subject.  The  ‘ exposition  ’ tends  to  subdivide  into  parts — sometimes  a 
brief  introduction,  then  the  first  subject  (often  reiterated),  leading  to 
a transition  into  the  contrasting  key,  in  which  is  the  second  subject  (also 
often  reiterated),  culminating  in  its  key,  often  with  a coda.  For  emphasis 
and  clearness  the  whole  exposition  is  regularly  repeated.  The  ‘ develop- 
ment ’ is  naturally  the  test  of  originality  and  musicianship.  In  it  the 
materials  presented  in  the  subjects  are  freely  handled,  torn  apart,  com- 
bined anew,  mixed  with  new  material,  interrupted  by  episodes  or  con- 
nective passages,  and  passed  from  key  to  key.  Here  the  advance  of  the 
Haydn  period  over  its  predecessor  was  marked,  since  the  need  of  defi- 
niteness and  coherence  was  better  felt,  and  the  ways  of  working  were 
better  understood.  The  development  properly  ends  in  the  contrasting 
key,  but  with  an  immediate  and  emphatic  return  to  the  original  key,  in- 
troducing the  1 recapitulation  ’ or  ‘ reprise,’  in  which  both  subjects  are 
restated,  with  a final  climax  and  often  a coda.  Sonata-form  is  character- 
istic of  the  first  movement,  and  hence  is  often  called  ‘ first-movement- 
form.’  But  it  is  also  common  in  the  last  movement,  and  may  occur 
even  in  the  other  movements. 

The  materials  taken  for  1 subjects  ’ from  Haydn’s  time  onward  are  al- 
most always  different  in  character  from  those  used  for  contrapuntal  treat- 
ment. Often  they  are  distinctly  lyrical,  as  if  from  a song,  or  solid 
harmonic  progressions,  as  if  from  a part-song  or  chorale,  or,  if  more  dis- 
tinctly instrumental,  are  employed  rather  for  their  pithy  decoration  of  a 
metric  pattern  or  a chord-sequence  than  for  their  adaptation  to  polyphonic 
unfolding.  In  a word,  they  are  decidedly  homophonic  or  harmonic  in 
essence.  And  all  the  treatment  given  them  is  dominated  by  homophonic 
or  harmonic  principles.  In  details,  of  course,  the  part-writing  must  be 
careful  and  significant,  and  occasionally  there  are  passages  that  recall  the 
polyphony  of  the  organ  style,  but  in  general  there  is  some  supreme 
melody  or  controlling  harmonic  progression  that  determines  the  form. 
Where  exceptions  occur,  they  are  felt  to  be  exceptions. 


344 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


Fig.  91. 


THE  ORCHESTRA 


345 


147.  The  Perfected  Orchestra.  — The  contrast  between  the  or- 
chestra of  the  early  18th  century  and  that  of  the  later  is  remark- 
able, the  change  being  due  both  to  the  rapid  advance  of  cham- 
ber music  and  to  the  shift  in  methods  of  musical  construction. 
In  the  Bach-Handel  period  the  wood-wind  rivaled  the  strings  in 
number  of  players,  the  deliberate  antithesis  of  tone-colors  in 
groups  was  comparatively  rare,  and  the  massive  effects  desired 
were  more  indiscriminately  vigorous  than  artfully  calculated. 
Design  in  composition  was  far  more  valued  than  coloring,  and 
the  interplay  of  parts  more  than  refinement  in  treating  them  in- 
dividually. The  polyphonic  ideal  gave  but  slight  spur  to  ex- 
pressiveness of  delivery.  But  in  the  Haydn-Mozart  period  the 
string-quartet  was  made  supreme  in  fact,  the  number  of  wood- 
wind players  reduced,  though  variety  of  tone  was  greatly  in- 
creased by  the  addition  of  clarinets  (especially  after  1775),  the 
study  of  the  tonal  groups  energetically  begun,  and  the  principle 
perceived  that  sonority  depends  less  upon  complexity  of  scoring 
or  loudness  of  playing  than  upon  a judicious  disposition  of  the 
tones  and  upon  purity  of  quality  in  each  instrument.  Color  or 
timbre  began  to  stand  on  a more  equal  footing  with  design  as  a 
means  of  expression  and  effect.  The  emphasis  on  expressive 
melody  forced  a new  attention  to  elasticity  and  shading. 

As  now  balanced  for  the  first  time,  the  modern  orchestra  comprises 
three  divisions  : (a)  the  strings,  including  first  and  second  violins,  violas 

(tenors)  and  double-basses  — a quartet ; (&)  the  wood-wind,  including 

first  and  second  flutes,  first  and  second  oboes,  first  and  second  clarinets, 
first  and  second  bassoons  — a quartet  with  interchangeable  upper  parts  ; 
(c)  the  brass,  including  first  and  second  horns,  first  and  second  trum- 
pets, and  two  kettledrums  — a partial  quartet.  It  is  to  be  noted  that  the 
violoncello  was  not  yet  commonly  used,  certainly  not  in  differentiation 
from  the  basses,  but  that  the  piccolo  (octave  flute),  the  cor  anglais  (tenor 
oboe),  the  basset-horn  (tenor  clarinet),  the  bass  clarinet,  more  than  two 
horns  or  two  trumpets,  two  to  three  trombones,  and  even  four  kettledrums 
were  occasionally  introduced  for  special  effects. 

It  should  be  remembered  that  till  about  1800  the  old  custom  persisted 
of  using  the  harpsichord  or  piano  with  the  orchestra  both  to  fill  in  some 
of  the  harmony  and  to  fix  the  tempo.  The  conductor  usually  led  from 
this  instrument,  though  the  use  of  the  baton  had  been  known,  though 
rarely  employed,  for  at  least  a century. 

It  would  be  interesting  if  the  exact  time  could  be  given  when  particular 
instruments  began  to  be  used  orchestrally,  but  the  data  are  few.  The  fol- 
lowing summary  remarks,  however,  may  be  given  upon  each  division  of 
the  ensemble.  ( a ) The  whole  violin  family  came  into  view  during  the 


346 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


17th  century,  its  members  being  slowly  perfected 
out  of  the  earlier  viols  and  gradually  supplanting 
them.  The  double-bass  alone  retained  the  old  viol 
contour.  Violins  were  used  perhaps  before  1600, 
certainly  by  Monteverdi  in  1608.  Tenors  doubt- 
less followed  soon,  but  were  commonly  combined 
with  the  basses  till  about  1750.  The  violoncello 
seems  not  to  have  been  recognized  till  after  1700, 
and  not  specially  esteemed  till  towards  1800. 
(b)  The  transverse  flute  was  used  by  Lully  in 
1677,  but  not  brought  into  wide  acceptance  till 
about  1720.  The  oboe  was  the  gradual  derivative 
of  several  forms  of  double-reed  instruments  that 
were  common  in  the  Middle  Ages,  especially  the 
schalmey,  but  its  mechanism  was  improved  early 
in  the  17th  century. 

The  cor  anglais  (possi- 
bly a corruption  of  cor 
angle)  was  similarly 
evolved  from  the  tenor 
pommer  of  olden  time, 
and  the  bassoon  from 
the  bomhart.  (The  in- 
vention of  the  bassoon 
is  doubtfully  attributed 
to  Afranio  of  Ferrara 
before  1539.)  The  clar- 
inet, with  but  one  reed, 
was  invented  by  J.  C. 

Denner  of  Nuremberg 
(d.  1707)  just  before 
1700,  but  did  not  make 
its  way  into  the  orches- 
tra till  after  1750  and 
was  not  common  till 

Fig.  93.  — Viola  da  gamba.  about  '775-  Its  medi- 
aeval  prototypes  are  ob- 
scure, though  one  of  them,  the  chalumeau,  persisted 
in  use  till  the  time  of  Gluck.  ( c ) The  horn  is  the 
descendant  of  the  mediaeval  hunting  horn ; its  or- 
chestral use  began  early  in  the  18th  century  against 
some  opposition  on  account  of  its  alleged  harsh- 
ness ! The  trumpet,  which  differs  from  the  horn 
in  mouthpiece  and  tube,  is  a military  instrument 
which  came  into  orchestral  use  without  much 
change.  The  trombone,  as  its  name  implies,  is  a 
big  trumpet  (tromba).  The  kettledrums  or  tim-  pIG  94.  _ Orchestral  or 
pani  have  an  ancient  pedigree,  largely  military.  ‘French’  Horns, 


THE  ORCHESTRA 


347 


Although  experiments  with  larger  or  smaller  aggregations 
of  instruments  had  been  going  on  for  two  centuries,  especially 
for  accompaniment,  the  true  orchestra  as 
a large  ensemble  for  independent  use, 
and  a true  theory  of  orchestration  as  a 
distinct  branch’  of  musicianship,  hardly 
began  before  1750.  Two  factors  cooper- 
ated in  this  advance  — the  cultivation  of 
chamber  music,  which  brought  out  the 
capacities  of  particular  instruments,  and 
the  growing  custom  of  public  concerts, 
for  which  the  orchestra  became  the  favor- 
ite artistic  apparatus.  In  this  period  the 
excellence  of  particular  orchestras  became 
a powerful  factor  in  musical  progress,  as 
they  offered  adequate  means  for  giving 
extended  works,  stimulated  virtuosity  on 
various  instruments,  and  set  a standard  of 
artistic  quality  generally. 

A striking  instance  was  the  Kapelle  of  Karl 
Theodor,  Elector  Palatine  from  1743,  residing 
at  Mannheim,  and  Elector  of  Bavaria  from  1778, 
residing  at  Munich.  He  was  devoted  to  good 
music,  as  to  other  arts  and  sciences,  and  his  band 
became  the  best  in  Europe  under  the  able  leader- 
ship of  Johann  Stamitz  (d.  1757),  concertmaster 
in  1743-57,  Ignaz  Holzbauer  (d.  1783),  choirmaster 
from  1 753,  and  Christian  Cannabich  (d.  1798),  con- 
certmaster from  1759.  These  leaders  developed  a 
unanimity,  a balance  of  tone  and  a perfection  of 
shading  entirely  unknown  before.  The  influence  of  Fig.  9S. _ Trombone.  The 
this  establishment  was  felt  far  and  wide,  being,  for  pitch  of  the  tone  is  partIy  de_ 
example,  one  of  the  potent  factors  in  the  unfolding  termined  by  sliding  the  lower 
of  Mozart’s  genius.  In  it,  indeed,  the  whole  modern  crook  out  or  in  upon  itself,  thus 
idea  of  concert  orchestration  may  be  said  to  have  altering  the  length  of  the  tube, 
taken  its  rise  (see  sec.  148). 

A somewhat  similar  instance  was  the  impulse  given  at  Paris  from  1751  by 
the  original  genius  of  Francis  Joseph  Gossec  (d.  1829),  who  antedated  Haydn 
as  a symphonist,  founded  the  Concerts  des  amateurs  in  1770,  reorganized  the 
Concerts  spirituels  in  1773,  etc.,  besides  winning  fame  as  an  opera-writer, 
sacred  composer  and  teacher  (see  secs.  154,  177).  His  endeavors  were  more 
or  less  hampered  by  the  absorption  of  the  Parisian  public  in  the  opera  rather 
than  concerts,  and  after  1790  the  unfolding  of  all  musical  art  in  France  was 
temporarily  checked  by  the  outbreak  of  the  Revolution, 


348 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


148.  The  Early  Symphonists.  — The  largest  forms  of  orches- 
tral writing  in  this  period  were  the  symphony  and  the  con- 
certo, the  latter  being  distinguished  by  the  prominence  given  to  a 
solo  instrument.  No  precise  date  can  be  named  for  the  inven- 
tion of  the  symphony,  since  it  was  gradually  evolved  from  the 
operatic  overture  (taking  its  name  from  the  old  term  ‘ sinfonia  ’), 
the  suite  and  the  solo  sonata.  The  scheme  of  movements  and 
the  use  of  two  subjects  in  at  least  one  of  them,  with  some 
details  of  handling,  are  traceable  before  1750,  though  not 
systematically  maintained.  It  has  been  common  to  call  Gossec 
and  Haydn  the  pioneers,  with  Emanuel  Bach  or  his  father  fore- 
shadowing both.  It  now  appears  that  special  emphasis  should 
also  be  placed  upon  the  improvements  in  technical  style  made 
by  the  Mannheim  group  of  composers,  under  the  lead  of  Stamitz 
and  others.  It  was  at  Mannheim  that  the  refinements  of  or- 
chestral expression  were  first  brought  fully  into  view  and  that  a 
series  of  composers  was  stimulated  to  produce  ambitious  works 
employing  these  new  resources.  Few  works  of  this  class  can 
be  exactly  dated,  so  that  the  historic  sequence  cannot  be  satis- 
factorily worked  out.  We  simply  know  that,  from  about  1750, 
symphonies  more  or  less  upon  modern  lines  began  to  multiply, 
that  soon  the  number  of  composers  engaged  upon  this  form 
decidedly  increased,  and  that  from  1780,  especially  under  the 
touch  of  Mozart’s  genius,  the  quality  of  the  style  became  per- 
manently significant.  It  is  true  that  among  the  hundreds  of 
symphonies  written  during  the  half-century  many  are  devoid 
of  interest  except  as  tokens  of  a general  movement  that  we  now 
know  had  a grand  destiny.  As  in  other  cases,  the  first  efforts 
were  largely  directed  toward  the  perfecting  of  tools  and  meth- 
ods. In  only  a few  examples  was  the  content  of  the  form  rich 
enough  to  compete  with  the  finer  works  of  the  next  period. 

Among  the  composers  in  this  field  before  1750,  the  Venetian  opera -writer 
Galuppi  (d.  1785)  deserves  mention  for  his  overtures  (from  about  1740). 
More  important  was  K.  P.  E.  Bach  (d.  1788),  the  Berlin  and  Hamburg  com- 
poser, with  almost  20  symphonies  (from  1741),  besides  many  works  in  related 
forms,  all  prefiguring  later  developments  (see  sec.  140). 

The  Mannheim  violinists  Johann  Stamitz  (d.  1757)  and  Franz  Xaver 
Richter  (d.  1789)  exerted  a wide  influence  through  their  attention  to  contrasts 
and  nuances  in  performance,  as  well  as  to  the  improvements  in  structure  that 
these  made  effective.  Stamitz  himself,  though  dying  when  only  40  years  old, 
wrote  nearly  50  symphonies,  besides  other  works,  in  a style  that  supplies  the 


THE  MANNHEIM  GROUP 


349 


basis  for  the  entire  Viennese  school.  Richter,  at  Mannheim  from  1747  and 
choirmaster  at  Strassburg  from  1769,  wrote  about  65  symphonies  and  much 
other  music  in  an  almost  equally  original  and  suggestive  manner. 

The  amount  of  production  called  forth  under  the  Mannheim  stimulus 
was  enormous,  embodied  not  only  in  symphonies,  but  in  every  other  variety 
of  ensemble  instrumental  music.  Among  the  composers  directly  connected 
with  Mannheim  were  the  Bohemian  ’cellist  Anton  Filtz  (d.  1760),  with 
nearly  40  symphonies;  Christian  Cannabich  (d.  1798),  Stamitz’  successor 
as  conductor  in  1759,  with  about  100  ; Ignaz  Holzbauer  (d.  1783),  with 
a multitude  of  works,  including  1 1 operas ; the  bassoonist  Ernst  Eichner 
(d.  1 777),  with  40  symphonies;  Giovanni  Battista  Toeschi  (d.  1800),  the 
third  member  of  a talented  family,  with  over  60 ; the  violinist  Franz 
Beck  (d.  1809),  from  1777  at  Bordeaux,  with  about  25;  Karl  Stamitz 
(d.  1801),  Johann’s  son,  early  noted  as  a virtuoso,  concertmaster  at 

Paris  from  1770,  making  extended  tours,  with  70;  and  his  brother  Anton 
Stamitz  (d.  c.  1820),  also  at  Paris  from  1770,  with  13. 

More  or  less  closely  under  the  Mannheim  influence  were  the  following : — 

Francis  Joseph  Gossec  (d.  1829),  otherwise  noted  as  an  opera-writer 
(see  sec.  154),  was  a Belgian  violinist,  in  Paris  from  1751  (see  sec.  147), 
who  wrote  over  25  symphonies  (from  1754)  and  many  quartets  of  real 
value.  Besides  raising  the  orchestral  standard  at  Paris,  at  the  Revolu- 
tion he  wrote  much  popular  patriotic  music.  Another  Belgian  was  Pierre  van 
Maldere  (d.  1768),  from  1755  in  service  to  Charles  of  Lorraine,  with  quartets 
(from  1757)  and  nearly  20  symphonies  (from  1769),  which  had  vogue  prior 
to  Haydn’s  popularity. 

Luigi  Boccherini  (d.  1805),  born  at  Lucca  in  1743,  stands  still  higher. 
Trained  as  a virtuoso  ’cellist,  he  worked  first  at  Lucca,  writing  oratorios 
and  an  opera,  made  tours  into  France,  Spain  and  Germany,  securing 
honors  at  several  courts,  and  then  lived  mostly  at  Madrid.  He  wrote 
nearly  350  chamber  works  (from  1768)  and  about  20  symphonies,  often 
with  distinction,  but  sometimes  carelessly.  His  later  style  was  influ- 
enced by  Haydn. 

Here  belong  also  Johann  Christian  Bach  (d.  1782),  the  youngest  of  the 
great  Bach’s  sons,  with  a large  number  of  symphonies  (see  sec.  15 1);  and 
Karl  Ditters  von  Dittersdorf  (d.  1799),  with  about  50  (see  sec.  154).  Only 
Boccherini  and  Ditters  are  counted  as  equaling  the  first  Mannheim  masters. 

A direct  link  between  Mannheim  and  Vienna  is  furnished  by  Leopold 
Hoffmann  (d.  1793),  who  from  1772  was  choirmaster  at  St.  Stephen’s  and  who, 
besides  much  church  music,  wrote  for  the  orchestra  so  cleverly  as  to  delay 
the  recognition  of  Haydn. 

Joseph  Haydn  (d.  1809),  as  already  stated  (sec.  145),  wrote  in  all  about 
125  symphonies  (from  1759),  the  best  after  he  had  begun  to  feel  the  impress 
of  Mozart  (especially  after  1790).  Michael  Haydn  (d.  1806),  his  younger 
brother,  chiefly  noted  as  a church  composer  (see  sec.  163),  was  an  able 
orchestral  writer,  with  30  symphonies  (from  1762)  and  other  works.  Those 
issued  in  1785  and  a quintet,  long  attributed  to  Joseph,  are  counted  the 
best.  For  some  reason  he  avoided  publication,  so  that  his  influence  was 
much  less  than  his  brother’s. 


350 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


Wolfgang  Amadeus  Mozart  (d.  1791)  as  a symphonist  was  not  so  prolific 
as  many  others  (see  sec.  157),  but  the  materials  and  the  elaboration  of 
his  best  works,  such  as  the  3 symphonies  in  1 788,  are  richer  and  stronger. 
The  themes  have  more  warmth  and  character,  the  harmony  and  part-writing 
more  variety  and  daring,  and  the  articulation  of  the  whole  is  more  full  of  ani- 
mation. He  had  a sure  grasp  of  instrumental  effects,  delighting,  for  example, 
in  charming  uses  of  the  wind  groups,  with  clarinets  and  horns  in  a novel 
prominence.  His  best  work  was  his  latest,  suggesting  how  much  further  he 
might  have  gone  if  his  life  had  been  prolonged. 

Rapid  mention  may  be  made  of  Friedrich  Schwindl  (d.  1786),  with  some 
15  symphonies  (from  1765);  G.  C.  Wagenseil  (d.  1777),  the  Viennese 
organist  and  clavecinist,  with  over  30;  Johann  Baptist  Wanhal  (d.  1813),  a 
Bohemian  at  Vienna,  the  producer  of  a prodigious  amount  of  facile  music,  in- 
cluding descriptive  pieces;  Wenzel  Pichl  (d.  1805),  also  a Bohemian,  court- 
composer  at  Milan  in  1775-96  and  then  at  Vienna,  with  about  700  works, 
including  about  90  symphonies ; Franz  Anton  Rossler  (d.  1792),  still  another 
Bohemian,  from  1776  serving  Prince  Esterhazy,  from  1781  Prince  Wallerstein, 
and  from  1788  at  Schwerin,  with  over  20  symphonies  and  much  chamber 
music  that  won  Haydn’s  respect;  Paul  Wranitsky  (d.  1808),  who  was  in 
Haydn’s  orchestra  and  became  court-conductor  at  Vienna,  with  numerous 
works,  including  over  25  symphonies  that  competed  in  popular  favor  with 
Haydn’s ; the  colorless  Ignaz  Joseph  Pleyel  (d.  1831),  at  one  time  a pupil  of 
Haydn,  the  holder  of  good  positions  at  Vienna,  Strassburg  and  London,  and 
finally  (1797)  the  founder  at  Paris  of  a famous  piano-factory,  with  30  sym- 
phonies and  other  works,  as  many  “as  the  sands  of  the  seashore”  (Eitner)  ; 
and  Ernst  Wilhelm  Wolf  (d.  1792),  from  1761  violinist  and  leader  at  Weimar, 
with  about  1 5 symphonies,  many  piano-concertos  and  chamber  pieces. 

149.  Instrumental  Virtuosi.  — The  period  was  notable  for  the 
steady  increase  in  the  number  and  importance  of  solo  players 
on  various  orchestral  instruments,  whose  genius  not  only  ex- 
panded the  range  of  technique  and  the  impressiveness  of 
performance,  but  made  worthy  contributions  to  composition. 
The  instrumental  voice  was  becoming  generally  recognized 
for  its  tonal  value  and  its  power  of  expression,  and  its  masterly 
use  in  concert  ways  was  winning  a place  as  a distinct  branch 
of  musical  art.  Naturally  the  violin  and  its  relatives  aroused 
the  greatest  interest,  but  there  was  notable  advance  in  the 
wood-wind  group  as  well.  The  frequent  tours  of  players  from 
city  to  city,  and  their  consequent  calls  to  service  here  and  there, 
did  much  to  extend  and  unify  musical  taste  in  different  lands. 

Although  the  earlier  impetus  to  artistic  violin-playing  had  been  given  by 
the  Italians  Corelli  and  Tartini,  and  radiated  from  them  through  various  lines 
of  tradition,  in  the  later  18th  century  the  centres  of  greatest  activity  were  not 
in  Italy,  but  at  Paris  and  in  Germany. 


LEADING  VIOLINISTS 


35 


Following  the  Corelli  tradition  the  greater  names  were  these  : — 

Gaetano  Pugnani  (d.  1798),  who  was  a pupil  both  of  Somis  at  Turin  and 
of  Tartini  at  Padua.  He  set  forth  as  a virtuoso  in  1754,  lived  much  at  Lon- 
don, and  from  1770  served  at  the  Turin  court  and  as  a teacher.  His  style 
was  broad  and  strong,  and  he  wrote  copiously  for  his  instrument  and  for  the 
orchestra,  his  works  including  many  sonatas,  much  chamber  music  and  13 
symphonies,  besides  several  operas.  Regarding  his  merits  as  a composer 
opinions  differ. 

Giovanni  Battista  Viotti  (d.  1824)  was  Pugnani's  greatest  pupil,  and  is 
often  called  ‘the  father  of  modern  violin-playing.1  In  1780,  with  his  teacher, 
he  toured  in  Germany,  Poland  and  Russia,  receiving  honors  at  St.  Peters- 
burg. Later  he  aroused  intense  enthusiasm  at  London  and  Paris,  but, 
offended  at  a fancied  coolness  in  the  Paris  audiences,  abruptly  left  the  con- 
cert-stage for  a time.  In  1789  he  began  giving  Italian  opera  at  Paris,  at  the 
Revolution  was  forced  to  resume  touring  and  appeared  at  London  and  Ham- 
burg, then  went  into  business  for  several  years,  though  without  losing  his 
consummate  skill  as  a player,  and  finally  (1819-22)  was  director  of  the  Paris 
Opera.  As  an  artist  he  excelled  in  every  way,  in  composition  as  well  as  in 
technique.  His  abundant  works,  ranging  from  solo  sonatas  up  to  quartets, 
quintets  and  nearly  30  concertos,  are  still  admired.  He  was  the  first  to  apply 
true  sonata-form  and  the  use  of  the  full  orchestra  to  the  violin-concerto.  He 
was  in  request  as  a teacher,  his  greatest  pupils  being  Rode  and  Baillot. 

In  the  direct  Tartini  line  were  the  following : — 

Pietro  Nardini  (d.  1793)  was  a constant  pupil  of  Tartini  till  1746.  Then, 
after  some  years  at  Livorno,  he  served  as  soloist  at  Stuttgart  in  1763-7,  was 
with  his  old  teacher  at  Padua  till  the  latter’s  death,  and  from  1770  was  court- 
director  at  Florence.  Good  critics  testify  to  the  purity  and  nobility  of  his 
style,  though  he  cared  little  for  showy  effects.  His  works  comprise  sonatas, 
quartets,  concertos,  etc.  His  best  pupil  was  Bartolomeo  Campagnoli  (d.  1827), 
who  came  to  Germany  in  1776,  touring  extensively,  was  concertmaster  at  the 
Gewandhaus  in  Leipsic  in  1797-1818,  and  finally  choirmaster  at  Neustrelitz. 
He  left  some  works,  especially  good  studies  and  a Method  (1797). 

Johann  Peter  Salomon  (d.  1815),  a pupil  of  Franz  Benda,  began  as  a boy 
(1758)  in  the  orchestra  at  Bonn,  from  1765,  after  a short  tour,  was  concert- 
master  to  Prince  Heinrich  of  Prussia  at  Rheinsberg,  and  in  1781  moved  to 
London,  where  his  superiority  as  a quartet-player  and  leader  brought  him 
long-continued  success.  He  was  quick  to  appreciate  the  works  of  Haydn  and 
Mozart  and  to  introduce  them  to  the  London  public.  In  1790  he  induced 
Haydn  to  visit  England,  and  between  them  a warm  friendship  resulted.  His 
powers  as  a performer  continued  till  his  last  years,  and  in  1813  he  was  the 
first  conductor  of  the  newly  founded  Philharmonic  Society.  His  composi- 
tions were  few  and  unimportant. 

The  founder  of  the  notable  Mannheim  group  (see  sec.  148)  was  Johann 
Stamitz  (d.  1757),  first  violin  in  the  electoral  orchestra  from  1743.  Early 
among  his  pupils  was  Christian  Cannabich  (d.  1798),  in  the  orchestra  from 
1747  and  Stamitz1  successor  in  1759.  His  renown  was  greatest  as  player  and 
trainer.  Karl  Stamitz  (d.  1801),  son  of  Johann,  after  8 years  in  the  or- 


352 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


chestra,  began  touring  in  1770,  was  for  many  years  in  a ducal  band  at  Paris, 
and  later  held  office  at  Cassel,  Jena  and  St.  Petersburg.  Rodolphe  Kreutzer 
(d.  1831),  a pupil  of  Anton  Stamitz,  made  his  debut  at  Paris  at  13  (1779), 
soon  entered  the  royal  band,  from  1790  produced  many  operas  (see  sec.  1 77), 
from  1796  taught  at  the  Conservatoire,  from  1801  was  soloist  at  the  Opera  and 
from  1817  its  director,  besides  court  service  under  Napoleon  and  Louis  XVIII. 
He  wrote  about  20  concertos,  many  chamber  pieces  and  solos,  40  masterly 
dtudes  and  (with  Rode  and  Baillot)  a standard  Method.  The  Mannheim 
traditions  were  also  spread  by  Ignaz  Franzl  (d.  1811),  who  entered  the 
orchestra  in  1747,  from  1774  was  concertmaster  and  remained  at  Mannheim 
when  the  orchestra  went  to  Munich,  by  Christian  Danner  (d.  1807?),  in  the 
orchestra  from  1770  and  leader  at  Carlsruhe  from  1787,  and  by  Ferdinand 
Franzl  (d.  1833),  who,  after  about  15  years  at  Frankfort  and  on  Russian 
tours,  in  1806  succeeded  Cannabich  at  Munich  — all  these  being  fruitful 
composers  as  well  as  significant  players. 

Here  may  well  be  mentioned  Leopold  Mozart  (d.  1787),  brought  up  at  Augs- 
burg, who  in  1 743  entered  the  service  of  the  Archbishop  of  Salzburg  and  there 
remained  till  his  death,  devoting  his  whole  energy  to  the  development  of  his 
son  (see  sec.  156).  He  was  a broadly  trained  composer,  writing  oratorios  and 
church  music,  symphonies,  sonatas,  etc.,  and  a famous  Violinschule  (1756). 

Pierre  GaviniSs  (d.  1800),  mostly  self-instructed  at  Bordeaux,  appeared  at 
Paris  in  1741,  became  a favorite  player  and  teacher,  and  was  called  by  Viotti 
‘the  French  Tartini.’  He  wrote  concertos,  sonatas  and  studies  (from  1760). 

Antonio  Lolli  of  Bergamo  (d.  1802)  first  became  famous  from  1762  as 
leader  at  Stuttgart,  but  from  1774  moved  from  place  to  place  throughout  Eu- 
rope. He  had  amazing  technique.  Among  his  pupils,  both  of  the  showy 
order,  were  Giovanni  Mane  Giornovichi  [Jarnowic]  (d.  1804),  appearing  at  Paris 
in  1770  (numerous  concertos),  and  Michel  Woldemar  (d.  1816),  a Frenchman 
who  lived  a wandering  life. 

From  the  many  other  names  that  might  be  given  the  following  may  be 
selected  because  of  their  influence  or  the  number  of  their  contributions  to 
orchestral  literature  : — Friedrich  Wilhelm  Rust  (d.  1796),  the  highly  cultivated 
director  at  Dessau  ; Niccolb  Mestrino  (d.  1790),  first  at  Vienna,  thenat  Paris; 
Fedcrigo  Fiorillo  (d.  c.  1823),  who  was  from  1788  associated  with  Salomon 
at  London ; Franz  Christoph  Neubauer  (d.  1795),  never  long  settled  anywhere ; 
Franz  Krommer  (d.  1831),  highly  honored  by  several  Hungarian  noblemen 
and  finally  by  the  Emperor  at  Vienna;  and  Andreas  Romberg  (d.  1821),  fa- 
mous as  a virtuoso  at  different  places,  living  longest  at  Hamburg,  who  was  also 
known  as  a vocal  composer  (operas  and  cantatas). 

Among  the  numerous  ’cellists  that  now  began  to  be  prominent  as  virtuosi  and 
composers  were  Pierre  Duport  (d.  1818),  appearing  first  at  Paris  in  1761 
and  from  1773  in  royal  service  at  Berlin ; Louis  Duport  (d.  1819),  his  brother 
and  an  abler  player,  working  at  Paris  till  the  Revolution  and  again  after  1812 
(excellent  Method,  1806-19)  ? Christoph  Schetky  (d.  1 773)  of  Darmstadt 
(many  works)  ; Bornhard  Romberg  (d.  1841),  cousin  of  Andreas  above  and 
his  constant  companion  from  1774  as  a virtuoso,  in  the  court  orchestra  at 
Berlin  in  1805-19  (numerous  and  excellent  works)  ; Anton  Kraft  (d.  1820), 


INSTRUMENTAL  VIRTUOSI 


353 


pupil  of  Haydn,  and  in  the  Esterhazy  orchestra  in  1778-90  and  in  that 
of  Lobkowitz  from  1796;  Nikolaus  Kraft  (d  1853),  his  son  and  also  in 
the  Lobkowitz  band,  at  Stuttgart  from  1814  (important  works);  and 
Jakob  Christian  Michael  Widerkehr  (d.  1823),  at  Paris  from  1783,  play- 
ing several  instruments  and  teaching  singing.  Here  may  be  added  the 
extraordinary  double-bassist  Domenico  Dragonetti  (d.  1846),  a Venetian,  fa- 
mous at  13  (1776)  for  his  unexampled  skill,  from  1794  at  London,  preserving 
for  a full  half-century  his  singular  eminence. 

A distinguished  flutist  was  Johann  Georg  Wunderlich  (d.  1819),  promi- 
nent at  Paris  from  1 779  as  player,  composer  and  teacher. 

Among  the  oboists  maybe  named  Christian  Samuel  Barth  (d.  1809),  when 
a boy  a pupil  of  J.  S.  Bach;  Johann  Christian  Fischer  (d.  1800),  from  1760 
at  Dresden,  from  1780  at  London;  and  especially  Ludwig  August  Le  Brun 
(d.  1790),  from  1764  in  the  Mannheim  and  Munich  orchestra,  but  widely 
known  through  tours. 

Francois  Devienne  (d.  1803),  a noted  Parisian  player  on  both  the  flute  and 
the  bassoon,  was  an  abundant  composer  for  ensembles  that  called  for  great  ad- 
vances in  the  technique  of  the  wind  instruments,  and  also  issued  a good  flute 
Method  (1795). 

From  the  noted  early  clarinettists  we  select  Franz  Tausch  (d.  1817),  one  of  a 
large  family  of  players,  in  the  Mannheim  and  Munich  orchestra  from  1770,  and 
from  1789  at  the  Berlin  court;  Joseph  Beer  (d.  1811),  from  1771  in  service 
in  France,  later  also  at  the  Berlin  court  — the  inventor  of  the  fifth  key  on  his 
instrument;  Michel  Yost  (d.  1786,  32  years  old),  pupil  of  Beer  at  Paris,  from 
1777  a favorite  concert-player  (many  works)  ; Jean  Xavier  Lefevre  (d.  1829), 
pupil  of  Yost,  public  player  from  1787,  at  the  Opera  in  1791-1817,  teacher  in 
the  Conservatoire  from  1795,  for  which  he  prepared  a Method  (1802)  — inven- 
tor of  the  sixth  key  ; and  Johann  Heinrich  Backofen  (d.  1830),  first  appearing 
about  1789,  a specialist  on  several  instruments  and  from  1815  head  of  a factory 
of  wind  instruments  at  Darmstadt. 

Famous  among  players  on  the  horn,  and  composers  for  it  and  kindred  in- 
struments, were  Johann  Wenzel  Stich  [Italianized  Punto  ] (d.  1803),  a Bo- 
hemian who  appeared  as  a virtuoso  about  1775,  was  in  Paris  in  1782-99,  then 
returned  to  Vienna  and  Prague  (numerous  facile  works  and  a Method,  1798)  ; 
Johann  Andreas  Amon  (d.  1825),  pupil  of  Stich  and  long  his  companion  on 
tours,  from  1789  at  Heilbronn,  from  1817  at  Wallenstein;  and  Georg  Abra- 
ham Schneider  (d.  1839),  Prince  Henry’s  orchestra  at  Rheinsberg  from  1790, 
from  1802  in  court  service  at  Berlin,  an  expert  on  wind  instruments  and  a 
prolific  composer  of  varied  works,  including  operettas  and  sacred  music. 

Here  may  be  mentioned  the  fact  that  about  1750  Johann  Anton  Mares  (d. 
1794),  a Bohemian,  introduced  in  Russia  the  peculiar  form  of  horn-music  in 
which  each  player  in  the  band  plays  but  a single  tone  (just  as  in  old  English 
change-ringing  there  was  a ringer  for  each  bell). 

Reference  should  also  be  made  to  the  noted  harpist  Johann  Baptist  Krump- 
holtz  (d.  T790),  who  appeared  at  Vienna  in  1772,  worked  for  a time  with  Haydn, 
from  1776  settled  in  Paris,  where  he  influenced  Erard  in  the  improvement  of 
his  instrument  (important  works). 


354 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


For  convenience,  sundry  notes  upon  improvements  in  instruments  may  here 
be  inserted : — 

Francois  Tourte  (d.  1835),  one  of  a family  of  bow-makers  at  Paris,  about 
1775-80,  perhaps  with  the  aid  of  the  violinist  Viotti,  perfected  a novel  type  of 
violin-bow  which  has  not  since  been  improved.  The  material  is  straight- 
grained Brazilian  lancewood  or 
snakewood,  delicately  tapered  and 
slightly  bent  inward  (by  heating), 
and  it  is  fitted  with  about  100  white 
horse-hairs,  the  tension  of  which  is 
controlled  by  a screw  at  the  ‘ nut.1 
This  invention  imparted  a new 
value  to  all  violin-playing. 

Anton  Bachmann  (d.  1800),  a 
Berlin  instrument-maker,  in  1778 
introduced  the  machine-head  for 
'cellos  and  basses,  and  also  in- 
vented a keyboard  attachment  for 
guitars. 

Charles  Clagget  (d.  1820),  an 
Irish  violinist,  from  1776  in  Lon- 
don, devised  a number  of  curious 
improvements  or  novelties  (book, 
1 793),  which,  however,  met  with 
no  acceptance. 

Georg  Joseph  Vogler  (d.  1814), 
the  eccentric  organist  and  teacher, 
in  1789  exhibited  at  Amsterdam  his  ‘orchestrion,1  a portable  organ  that  included 
many  new  ideas,  such  as  the  imitation  of  orchestral  effects,  largely  by  the  use 
of  free-reed  pipes.  Similar  instruments  were  made  in  1796-8  at  Prague  by 
Thomas  Anton  Kunz,  and  in  1800  at  Vienna  by  Johann  Nepomuk  Malzel 
(d.  1838)  — the  last  better  known  for  his  ‘metronome1  (1816,  Paris).  Vog- 
ler’s  advocacy  of  free  reeds  is  supposed  to  have  arisen  from  his  seeing  a 
Chinese  ‘cheng1  (see  sec.  11),  or  hearing  of  its  principle,  at  St.  Petersburg  in 
1788  — the  idea  having  been  used  there  by  Kirschnigk  and  Rackwitz.  Since 
his  day  free-reed  pipes  have  been  sparingly  used  in  pipe-organs.  The 
principle  had  notable  application  in  the  ‘orgue  expressif1  or  ‘harmonium,1 
developed  later  in  France. 


Fig.  96. — Bows  for  Viols.  The  first  five  be- 
long with  savage  or  semi-civilized  instruments, 
the  sixth  and  seventh  with  double-basses,  the 
eighth  with  the  ’cello,  the  ninth  with  the  violin. 


CHAPTER  XX 


GLUCK  AND  THE  DRAMATIC  REFORM 

150.  The  Operatic  Situation. — The  latter  half  of  the  18th  cen- 
tury was  a time  of  enormous  activity  in  operatic  music.  At 
least  seventy-five  composers  might  be  named  whose  ability  or 
practical  success  gave  them  prominence.  So  intense  was  the 
popular  demand  that  perhaps  as  many  as  2500  operas  of  all 
sorts  were  written,  of  which  many  hundreds  were  produced. 
The  field  may  be  roughly  divided  between  three  principal  groups 
— the  Neapolitans,  whether  working  in  Italy  or  abroad,  the 
Viennese  (including  some  belated  Venetians),  and  the  French. 
Other  national  groups,  however,  were  beginning  to  appear  as 
offshoots  from  these,  though  none  of  them,  not  even  the  Ger- 
man, was  yet  of  much  importance. 

At  first  Italian  models  were  almost  everywhere  supreme, 
though  in  Paris  they  were  in  competition  with  styles  of  French 
origin.  The  opera  seria  was  at  its  extreme  of  structural  for- 
mality and  showy  heartlessness  — a procession  of  conventional 
arias  designed  to  exhibit  the  dexterity  of  vocalists  and  to  feed 
the  popular  craving  for  sensation.  Except  in  the  hands  of  a 
few  writers,  the  musical  structure  was  meagre  and  common- 
place, lacking  both  harmonic  and  contrapuntal  life,  and  unsup- 
ported by  any  broad  sense  of  orchestral  treatment.  Opera-writing 
was  largely  a knack  or  a trade,  which  many  an  aspirant  felt  he 
could  acquire  at  short  notice  and  then  honorably  exercise  as 
long  as  public  favor  could  be  shrewdly  cajoled.  The  principal 
exception  in  the  prevailing  flatness  was  the  opera  buffa,  with 
its  tendency  to  transgress  traditions  by  developing  real  person- 
ification, pithy  and  animated  action,  and  extended  ensemble  or 
concerted  effects.  The  reaction  of  this  upon  the  opera  seria 
was  beginning  to  be  felt,  so  that  the  line  between  the  two  was 
growing  fainter  — one  of  the  signs  of  a new  era. 

355 


356 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


Between  1760  and  1780,  however,  came  the  revolution  pro- 
claimed and  executed  by  Gluck,  which  aimed  to  uproot  established 
traditions,  to  emancipate  the  opera  from  its  long  slavery  to  the 
mere  concert  ideal,  and  to  make  it  again  what  its  early  progen- 
itors had  meant  it  to  be,  a true  drama  in  music.  Gluck  reached 
his  convictions  by  slow  processes  of  study  and  reflection,  and 
he  advanced  them  by  argument  as  well  as  by  illustration,  thus 
precipitating  a violent  discussion  that  extended  over  many  years. 
But  the  time  was  ripe  for  new  views,  and  they  were  consciously 
or  unconsciously  adopted  by  other  composers  after  1780.  Fore- 
most in  this  number  was  Mozart,  whose  effective  period  immedi- 
ately succeeded  that  of  Gluck. 

One  of  the  minor  features  of  the  period  was  the  reversion  in 
Germany  to  the  old  singspiel  type,  with  its  freedom  to  use 
spoken  dialogue  and  its  predilection  for  simple  songs. 

151.  The  Later  Neapolitans.  — The  popularity  of  the  concert- 
opera  in  the  sensuous  melodic  style  of  southern  Italy  was  up- 
held by  a large  number  of  prolific  and  often  talented  writers, 
and  their  works  were  in  favor  all  over  Europe.  In  one  case, 
that  of  Piccinni,  by  the  exigencies  of  a Parisian  partisan  debate 
this  type  was  brought  into  direct  and  disastrous  competition  with 
the  stronger  ideas  of  Gluck,  but  elsewhere  it  encountered  little 
opposition  until  about  the  time  of  the  French  Revolution 
(1792-5).  After  that  time  the  Neapolitan  school  as  such  fol- 
lowed the  Venetian  and  the  Bolognese  into  oblivion,  its  best 
representatives,  like  Cherubini,  becoming  merged  in  new 
groups,  characterized  by  tendencies  that  belong  rather  to  the 
19th  century. 

Several  of  the  composers  mentioned  in  secs.  125-126  continued  at  work 
after  1750  — notably  Jommelli  (d.  1774)  at  Stuttgart  and  Naples,  Duni  (d. 
1 775)  at  Paris,  Hasse  (d.  1783)  at  Dresden  and  Vienna,  Bernasconi  (d.  1784) 
at  Munich,  and  Galuppi  (d.  1785)  at  St.  Petersburg  and  Venice.  At  Paris, 
also,  was  the  veteran  Rameau  (d.  1764),  representing  the  best  of  the  native 
French  style  (see  sec.  127). 

Tommaso  Traetta  (d.  1779),  born  in  1727  at  Naples  and  trained  for  nine 
years  under  Durante,  began  as  a church  composer,  but  from  1751  became 
noted  as  an  opera-writer,  working  in  1758-65  at  Parma,  then  at  Venice,  and 
in  1768-75  at  St.  Petersburg  (following  Galuppi),  with  visits  to  Vienna 
(1759,  ’6o),  Munich  (1767)  and  London  (1775-6).  As  examples  of  his  over 
35  operas  may  be  mentioned  Ezio  (1754,  Rome),  Ippolito  ed  Aricia  (1759, 


NEAPOLITAN  OPERA- WRITERS 


357 


Parma),  Ifigenia  in  Aulide  (1759,  Vienna)  and  Armide  (1761,  Vienna).  He 
was  gifted  musically  and  dramatically,  and  has  been  credited  with  some  fore- 
gleams of  Gluck’s  ideas. 

Nicola  Piccinni  (d.  1800),  born  in  1728,  studied  about  twelve  years  under 
Leo  and  Durante,  and  then  (1754)  risked  competition  with  Logroscino  in 
opera  buffa,  displacing  the  latter  as  the  popular  favorite  at  Naples  and  Rome, 
and  becoming  famous  far  and  wide.  Before  1775  he  produced  at  least  60 
operas,  serious  and  comic,  as  a rule  with  success,  since  his  gift  of  melody  was 
ample  and  his  power  in  ensemble-finali  unique.  In  1776  he  was  induced  to 
move  to  Paris,  where  the  enemies  of  Gluck  seized  him  and  pushed  him  forward, 
against  his  will,  as  representing  the  true  lyric  ideal.  Hence  developed  the 
fiercest  contest  in  music-history,  that  between  the  1 Gluckists  ’ and  the  ‘ Piccin- 
nists.’  In  all  this  Piccinni  himself  held  aloof,  except  that  he  strove  to  execute 
worthily  the  commissions  given  him.  His  Parisian  productions  continued  till 
1789,  some  being  well  received,  but  others  suffering  by  comparison  with  the 
vigor  of  Gluck  or  the  fresh  popularity  of  Sacchini.  His  direct  competition 
with  Gluck  {iphigenie  en  Tauride , 1781)  was  distinctly  unsuccessful,  Piccinni 
himself  acknowledging  his  rival’s  greatness.  From  1784  he  taught  in  the 
royal  music-school.  Returning  to  Naples  in  1789,  he  fell  under  suspicion  of 
republicanism,  was  kept  a prisoner  in  his  house  for  four  years,  and  lapsed  into 
poverty,  against  which  he  struggled  by  writing  some  oratorios  and  church 
music.  In  1798,  however,  he  was  called  to  Paris  to  receive  a pension  and 
other  honors,  which  his  broken  health  did  not  long  allow  him  to  enjoy.  His 
operas  are  said  to  have  numbered  over  130,  of  which  about  90  are  still  traceable. 
Among  the  most  noted  were  Alessand?*o  nelV  Indie  (1758,  Rome),Z«  Cecchina 
(1760,  Rome),  L'Olimpiade  (1761,  Rome),  La  Didone  (1769,  Naples), 
Antigono  (1771,  Rome),  Roland  (1778,  Paris),  Atys  (1780,  Paris)  and  Didon 
(1783,  Paris).  It  is  probable  that  some  of  his  works  were  carefully  studied 
by  Mozart  before  1781. 

Antonio  Maria  Gasparo  Sacchini  (d.  1786),  a fisher-boy,  was  discovered  by 
Durante,  with  whom  he  studied  eight  years.  From  1756  he  wrote  colloquial 
comic  operas  at  Naples,  and  from  1762  undertook  grand  opera  with  rapid 
success  at  Rome  and  other  cities,  becoming  a strong  rival  of  Piccinni.  In 
1768  he  succeeded  Traetta  at  Venice  as  a teacher,  writing  considerable  sacred 
music.  After  sojourns  at  Munich  and  Stuttgart,  from  1772  he  was  in  London, 
reproducing  his  earlier  works.  In  1781  he  visited  Paris  and  soon  removed 
thither,  once  more  competing  ably  with  Piccinni.  In  all,  he  wrote  about  60 
operas,  varying  in  size  and  importance,  those  of  his  youth  being  specially  full 
of  spirit  and  of  simple,  graceful  melody,  though  hasty  in  workmanship,  while 
those  later  were  less  spontaneous,  but  better  finished.  The  leading  examples 
are  Seiniramide  (1762,  Rome),  Alessandro  nelV  Indie  (1768,  Venice),  Scipione 
(1770,  Munich),  Rinaldo  (1783,  Paris),  Oedipe  (1786,  Versailles),  Arvire 
et  Evelina  (1788,  Paris,  finished  by  Rey).  He  also  left  some  orchestral 
and  clavier-pieces. 

Pietro  Guglielmi  (d.  1804),  born  in  1727,  was  another  pupil  of  Durante, 
though  when  is  not  clear.  It  is  claimed  that  he  began  opera-writing  as  early 
as  1739.  Winning  applause  in  Italy  by  many  works  before  1762,  he  then 
worked  for  a time  at  Dresden  and  Brunswick,  and  in  1772-7  was  in  London, 


358 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


competing  moderately  with  other  favorites.  The  next  15  years  he  was  in 
Naples  again,  where  he  succeeded  in  reasserting  his  strength  even  against 
Paisiello  and  Cimarosa.  In  1793  he  became  choirmaster  at  St.  Peter’s  in 
Rome  and  devoted  himself  to  oratorios  and  church  music.  He  is  said  to  have 
written  200  operas,  of  which  most  have  vanished.  Chief  among  them  were 
/ viaggiatori  ridicoli  (1772,  London),  Pappamosca  (1783,  Milan),  Enea  e 
Lavinia  (1785,  Naples ),  La  pastorella  nobile  (1785,  Naples),  / due  genielli 
(1789,  Milan),  La  bella  pescatrice  (1789,  Naples)  and  La  serva  innamorata 
(1790,  Naples).  Of  his  oratorios,  Debora  e Sisara  (1794)  is  noted  as  one 
of  the  best  examples  from  the  whole  period. 

Francesco  di  Majo  (d.  1771),  probably  a pupil  of  Martini,  died  very  young  (31 
years  at  most).  But  his  brilliant  promise  secured  him  high  place  in  the 
Royal  Chapel  at  Naples,  and  his  fine  dramatic  power  was  shown  in  nearly  20 
operas  (from  1759)*  He  also  wrote  considerable  church  music. 

Johann  Christian  Bach  (d.  1782),  born  in  1735,  *he  youngest  surviving  son 
of  the  great  Bach,  after  his  father’s  death  in  1750  continued  his  studies  with 
his  brother  Emanuel  at  Berlin,  from  1754  with  Martini  at  Bologna,  and  from 
1757  partly  at  Naples.  He  became  a Roman  Catholic  and  from  1760  was  or- 
ganist at  Milan,  but  was  much  occupied  over  operas,  of  which  Catone  was  the 
first  (1758).  By  1762  his  fame  had  spread  so  that  he  was  invited  to  London, 
producing  Orione  and  Zanaida  (both  1763)  and  becoming  music-master  in  the 
royal  family.  In  1764-5  occurred  his  memorable  intercourse  with  the  boy 
Mozart.  He  was  in  request  as  a clavier-teacher,  and  from  1764  collaborated 
with  Abel  in  a noted  series  of  public  concerts,  which  continued  till  his  death. 
In  1772  and  ’74  he  gave  operas  at  Mannheim  and  in  1779  at  Paris  (near  the  close 
of  the  Gluck-Piccinni  contest).  In  all,  he  wrote  20  operas,  with  several  pas- 
ticcios  and  cantatas,  and  a notable  dramatic  oratorio,  Gioas  (1770).  He  was 
a significant  contributor  to  the  evolution  of  the  symphony  and  to  chamber 
music,  wrote  extensively  for  the  clavier,  and  while  in  Italy  worked  assiduously 
on  church  music  (a  fine  Te  Deum,  1759,  etc.)  in  the  strict  style.  He  was  the 
only  Bach  who  was  fully  identified  with  the  new  styles  later  in  the  century. 

Johann  Gottlieb  Naumann  (d.  1801),  born  at  Dresden  in  1741,  being  early 
taken  to  Italy,  secured  lessons  from  Tartini  and  Martini  and  at  Naples,  bringing 
out  his  first  opera  at  Venice  (1763).  In  1764  he  became  electoral  church 
composer  at  Dresden,  but  soon  visited  Italy  again  as  a favorite  opera-writer. 
Though  invited  elsewhere,  he  held  his  place  at  Dresden,  where  from  1776  he 
was  choirmaster.  He  made  long  stays  at  Stockholm  (where  he  raised  Italian  opera 
to  a high  standard),  Copenhagen  and  Berlin,  securing  by  his  facility  and  refine- 
ment much  renown  for  the  time.  He  wrote  23  operas,  among  which  were 
AjnpJiion  (1772,  Stockholm),  Solimano  (1773,  Venice),  Cora  and  Gustav  Vasa 
(Swedish  texts,  1780,  ’83),  La  dama  soldato  (1791,  Dresden)  and  Protesilao 
(1793,  Berlin),  many  oratorios,  much  church  music,  including  several  good 
masses  and  a noted  Vater  Unser,  many  symphonies,  etc.  It  is  noticeable  that 
his  prominence  at  Dresden  dates  from  Hasse’s  departure. 

Giacomo  Tritto  (d.  1824),  born  in  1733,  lived  a long  life,  almost  wholly  at 
Naples,  studying  under  Cafaro  and  Sala,  and  succeeding  them  both  as  an  influen- 
tial teacher.  His  about  50  operas  extended  through  a full  half-century  (1764- 
1815),  and  he  also  wrote  extensively  for  the  church.  Late  in  life  (1821-3)  he 
published  theoretical  works. 


NEAPOLITAN  OPERA-WRITERS 


359 


Giovanni  Paisiello  (d.  i8i6),bornin  1741,  studied  nine  years  at  Naples  under 
Durante,  Cotumacci  and  Abos,  the  last  four  years  himself  serving  as  a teacher. 
In  1765  began  the  long  series  of  dramatic  works  that  continued  for  almost  40 
years  and  made  him  famous  throughout  Europe.  From  1776  he  was  at  St. 
Petersburg  in  the  employ  of  the  Empress  Catherine,  returning  in  1784  to  royal 
service  at  Naples.  In  1802-3  he  was  in  high  favor  with  Napoleon  at  Paris, 
after  which  he  resumed  his  post  at  Naples.  From  1 772  he  produced  more  or  less 
sacred  music  as  well  — masses,  motets,  a Passion  (1782,  Warsaw)  ; and  he  was 
a fertile  instrumental  composer  — many  symphonies,  quartets,  concertos,  etc. 
But  he  chiefly  excelled  in  opera,  especially  in  buffo  forms  or  those  that  min- 
gled the  comic  with  the  serious.  He  was  strong  as  a melodist,  not  so  much  in 
the  conventional  and  stilted  style,  but  in  spontaneous  lyricalness,  and  his  han- 
dling of  accompaniments  was  original  and  ingenious.  Occasionally  he  rose  to  a 
degree  of  dramatic  sublimity  and  force,  though  his  best  talent  lay  in  charming 
and  piquant  effects.  Of  his  more  than  100  operas  and  operettas  many  had 
special  success,  such  as  L 1 idolo  cinese  (1767,  Naples),  La  serva  padrona  (1769, 
Naples),  II  matrimonio  inaspettato  (1778,  St.  Petersburg),  II  bar  bier e di 
Siviglia  (1782,  St.  Petersburg),//  re  Teodor o (1784,  Vienna),  II  molinara 
(1788,  Naples),  Nina  (1789,  Naples),  / zingari  ( 1789,  Naples)  and  Proserpina 
(1803,  Paris).  He  was  much  in  competition  with  Piccinni  and  Cimarosa, 
sharing  with  them  the  highest  popularity  of  the  period. 

Several  lesser  names  follow.  Gennaro  Astarita  (d.  1803?)  wrote  about  35 
popular  operas,  mostly  comic  (from  1765),  given  throughout  Italy  and  some- 
what elsewhere,  including  Circe ed  Ulisse  (1777).  Felice  Alessandri  (d.  1798) 
began  as  both  clavierist  and  opera-writer  (from  1767),  and  worked  at  Turin, 
Paris,  London,  St.  Petersburg  and  Berlin,  producing  about  30  operas  of  tran- 
sient value.  Nicola  Antonio  Zingarelli  (d.  1837),  born  in  1752,  entered  the 
opera  field  in  1768,  but  not  strikingly  until  1785,  whence  his  activity  continued 
till  1 81 1,  with  about  30  operas,  the  most  famous  being  Romeo  e Giulietta  (1796, 
Milan).  His  official  posts  and  his  greater  renown  were  in  connection  with 
church  music  (see  sec.  163).  Pasquale  Anfossi  (d.  1797),  born  in  1727  and  a 
pupil  of  Piccinni,  began  writing  operas  in  1758,  soon  sought  to  rival  his  teacher 
at  Rome,  visited  Paris,  London,  Berlin,  Prague  and  Florence  in  a busy  search 
for  popularity,  and  from  1791  was  choirmaster  at  the  Lateran  in  Rome.  His 
operas  number  over  70,  of  which  Li  incognita  persegnitata  (1 773,  Rome)  was 
the  first  to  show  his  clever  talent.  Giacomo  Insanguine  [or  Monopoli,  from 
his  birthplace]  (d.  1796),  pupil  at  Naples  of  Cotumacci,  produced  21  operas 
(1756-82)  and  also  fair  church  music,  as  the  yist  Psalm  (1775).  Giuseppe  Gaz- 
zaniga  (d.  1818),  pupil  of  Porpora  and  Piccinni,  wrote  about  45  operas  (from 
1768),  among  which  was  Ilconvitato  di pietr a (1787,  Venice),  with  a libretto 
whi ch  influenced  that  of  M ozart’s  Doji  Giovanni  (same  year,  Prague) . Giuseppe 
Giordani  (d.  1798)  began  opera-writing  in  1771  at  Pisa,  from  1772  taught  in 
London  and  Dublin,  besides  giving  operas,  and  in  1782  returned  to  Italy,  in 
1791  becoming  choirmaster  at  Fermo.  He  produced  about  35  operas,  among 
them  II  bacio  (1774,  London),  and  much  instrumental  and  some  church 
music. 

Domenico  Cimarosa  (d.  1801)  was  born  near  Naples  in  1749  and  studied 
therefor  eleven  years  under  Manna,  Sacchini,  Fenaroli  and  Piccinni.  In  1772 


360 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


began  his  phenomenal  series  of  nearly  80  operas,  completed  often  with  in- 
credible rapidity,  sometimes  several  in  a year.  This  facility,  however,  was 
supported  by  abundant  melodic  inspiration,  especially  in  the  expression  of 
sparkling  humor,  by  a sure  instinct  for  proportion  and  balance,  by  great  ability 
in  the  organization  of  ensemble  passages,  and  by  fine  orchestral  resourceful- 
ness. He  almost  immediately  became  a strong  competitor  of  Paisiello,  then 
at  the  height  of  his  popularity,  and  ultimately  surpassed  him,  rising  close  to 
Mozart’s  level.  Until  about  1781  he  divided  his  time  chiefly  between  Naples 
and  Rome.  In  1788  he  was  invited  to  St.  Petersburg  to  succeed  Paisiello, 
receiving  princely  honors  in  many  cities  on  the  way  thither.  In  1792,  though 
in  high  favor  among  the  Russian  nobility,  he  moved  to  Vienna,  where  he  was 
made  imperial  choirmaster  at  an  enormous  salary.  Soon  he  was  back  in  Italy, 
still  the  object  of  prodigious  enthusiasm.  In  1799,  having  displayed  at 
Naples  his  sympathy  with  republican  ideas,  he  was  imprisoned  and  sentenced 
to  death,  but  was  finally  only  banished.  Going  to  Venice,  while  working  on 
a fresh  opera,  he  suddenly  died.  Of  his  almost  80  operas,  by  universal  con- 
sent II  matrimonio  segreto  (1792,  Vienna)  was  counted  the  best,  but  many 
other  fine  ones  might  be  named,  such  as  La  finta  parigina  (1773,  Naples), 
II  fanatico  pergli  antichi  Romani  (1 777,  Naples),  which  is  said  to  have  been 
the  first  instance  in  which  concerted  numbers  were  used  in  the  midst  of  the 
action,  li  Italiana  in  Londra  (1779,  Rome),  Cajo  Mario  (1780,  Rome), 
V Olimpiade  (1784,  Vicenza),  La  vergine  del  sole  (1788,  St.  Petersburg), 
/,’  astuzie  femminili  (1794,  Naples),  etc.  He  also  wrote  5 oratorios  and  some 
church  music,  besides  overtures,  other  instrumental  pieces  and  numerous 
cantatas  and  solos. 

Rapid  reference  may  be  made  to  a few  later  writers.  Luigi  Caruso  (d.  1822), 
choirmaster  at  Perugia,  composed  about  55  operas  (1773-1810),  besides  sacred 
music.  Pietro  Carlo  Guglielmi  (d.  1827),  son  of  Pietro  above,  imitated  his 
father’s  style  in  some  40  operas  (1791-1819),  mostly  for  Naples.  Giuseppe 
Farinelli  (d.  1836),  in  later  life  choirmaster  at  Trieste,  wrote  over  50  operas 
(1791-1819),  mostly  comic,  skillfully  copying  Cimarosa.  Valentino  Fioravanti 
(d.  183 7),  first  an  opera-writer  (from  1784)  at  Naples,  Turin  and  Lisbon,  and 
from  1816  choirmaster  at  St.  Peter's  in  Rome,  brought  out  over  75  comic 
operas,  the  best-known  being  Le  cantatrici  villa)ie  (1803,  Naples). 

152.  Gluck  as  a Reformer.  — The  career  of  Gluck  belongs  to 
two  periods  in  more  than  one  sense.  Chronologically  it  fell 
partly  within  the  period  of  Bach  and  partly  within  that  of 
Haydn.  And  in  spirit  and  purpose  it  belonged  at  first  to  the 
conventional  class  of  Jommelli,  Hasse,  Piccinni  and  the  rest, 
while  later  it  escaped  into  a wholly  new  class.  Gluck  is  per- 
haps the  most  brilliant  illustration  in  music-history  of  a genius 
that  completely  outgrew  its  original  ambitions,  so  that  it  finally 
entered  upon  creation  of  which  at  the  start  it  did  not  dream. 
His  historic  significance,  however,  lay  not  so  much  in  the  new 
ideals  that  dawned  upon  him  — for  these  were  not  absent  from 


GLUCK’S  OPERATIC  REFORM 


361 


some  other  minds  of  his  day  — but  in  his  ability  to  bring  them 
to  tangible  embodiment  in  works  so  beautiful  and  powerful  as 
to  arrest  the  attention  of  the  musical  world.  He  was  much 
more  than  a theoretical  critic.  As  he  caught  sight  of  new 
paths,  he  himself  broke  the  way  into  them,  and  to  such  pur- 
pose that  the  entrance  could  never  again  be  closed.  It  is 
probable,  however,  that  his  ultimate  triumph  as  a pioneer  was 
facilitated  by  his  long  experience  in  following  the  fashions  of 
the  age,  though  from  one  point  of  view  the  first  half  of  his  life 
seems  almost  wasted. 

Christoph  Willibald  Gluck  (d.  1787)  was  born  in  1714  near  Nuremberg, 
the  son  of  a forester  or  game-keeper  who  moved  from  estate  to  estate.  At  12 
he  was  sent  to  a Jesuit  school  at  Ko- 
motau,  where  he  learnt  singing,  violin, 

’cello,  clavier  and  organ.  In  1732  he 
removed  to  Prague,  partially  supporting 
himself  by  giving  lessons  and  making 
music  for  rustic  gatherings.  At  22 
(1736)  he  was  taken  up  by  Prince 
Lobkowitz  at  Vienna,  introduced  to 
the  musical  circle  at  court,  and  thus 
thrown  in  the  way  of  Count  Melzi, 
who  took  him  to  Milan  for  lessons  from 
Sammartini.  Here  he  remained  four 
years. 

In  1741  he  brought  out  his  first  opera 
at  Milan,  which  led  to  commissions 
there  and  elsewhere.  In  1745  he  was 
invited  to  London,  but  without  much 
success,  owing  partly  to  Handel’s  popu- 
larity. After  visiting  Hamburg  and 
giving  a hasty  work  at  Dresden,  from  1748  he  made  his  home  at  Vienna,  hav- 
ing the  entree  into  the  best  society.  He  was  immediately  summoned  to 
prepare  an  opera  at  court,  La  Semiramide,  which  was  very  successful,  and  in 
1749  was  called  to  Copenhagen  on  a similar  errand.  Thence  he  went  to 
Rome  and  Naples,  where  his  Telemacco  was  well  received  — a work  showing 
signs  of  new  ideas.  In  1750  he  married  at  Vienna  the  accomplished  Marianne 
Pergin.  In  1751  he  was  made  conductor  to  Prince  Frederick  at  Vienna,  and 
in  1754  was  officially  attached  to  the  Opera.  In  1754,  also,  he  gave  two 
works  at  Rome,  being  made  by  the  Pope  Chevalier  of  the  Golden  Spur.  Be- 
sides fulfilling  other  commissions,  in  1756  he  produced  II  re  pastor e,  with 
new  tokens  of  growth,  especially  regarding  the  overture,  and  in  1761  filled  an 
engagement  at  Bologna.  Several  of  his  larger  works  hitherto  had  been  on 
librettos  by  Metastasio,  but  he  had  written  many  slighter  ones,  and  now 
essayed  some  texts  by  Favart,  the  distinguished  French  librettist  of  light 
opera  — as  La  rencontre  vnprevue  (1764).  While  thus  far  skillfully  adapting 


362 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


himself  to  the  standards  of  the  operatic  world  as  he  found  them,  he  had  also 
already  become  an  independent  student. 

In  1762,  with  the  help  of  the  cultivated  Calzabigi  as  librettist,  he  boldly 
struck  out  on  a new  line  with  Orfeo  ed  Euridice , though  his  lack  of  full  con- 
viction is  evidenced  by  considerable  admixture  of  conventional  methods. 
The  public  was  at  first  bewildered  with  this  work,  but  finally  accepted  it  with 
interest.  Though  not  hesitating  to  continue  his  old  style  and  to  repeat  old 
works,  in  1 767  Gluck  took  the  second  step  in  the  new  path  with  Alceste  (text 
by  Calzabigi),  and  now  used  his  fresh  ideas  with  more  confidence.  Its  re- 
ception was  not  enthusiastic,  for  the  theme  was  gloomy,  the  treatment  austere 
and  the  climax  poor  (later  made  worse  by  a French  alteration).  Paride  ed 
Elena  followed  in  1770  (text  by  Calzabigi),  with  a remarkable  revelation  of 
latent  power  in  romantic  lyricism.  Gluck  had  now  secured  a considerable 
following  at  Vienna,  especially  among  the  thoughtful,  but  his  innovations 
were  also  sharply  criticised. 

In  1774,  after  considerable  diplomatic  correspondence  with  the  authorities 
of  the  Paris  Opera,  Gluck  appeared  there  with  Iphiglnie  m Aulide  (text 
adapted  from  Racine),  the  fourth  work  in  the  new  style  and  not  one  of  the  best. 
It  was  produced  only  after  incredible  difficulties,  owing  to  the  incompetence 
of  the  musical  forces  and  the  machinations  of  enemies,  at  the  end  overcome 
only  by  the  personal  intervention  of  Marie  Antoinette  (who  had  been  Gluck’s 
pupil  at  Vienna) . The  work  made  a hit,  secured  for  the  composer  munificent 
rewards  at  Paris  and  a new  court  office  at  Vienna,  and  led  at  once  to  the  re- 
casting of  other  works  for  the  Parisian  stage,  some  of  which  succeeded,  while 
others  failed.  In  1776  Gluck’s  opponents  undertook  to  overthrow  him  by  im- 
porting the  veteran  Piccinni  as  a rival,  thus  bringing  on  the  brief  but  famous 
war  between  the  partisans  of  the  old  and  new  ideas.  In  1777  Gluck  produced 
Armide  (text  by  Quinault,  written  for  Lully,  1686),  a work  of  much  romantic 
beauty,  which,  however,  did  not  at  once  succeed.  In  1778  both  Piccinni  and 
Gluck  were  induced  to  write  upon  the  same  libretto,  Iphigenie  en  Tauride  (by 
Guillard),  Gluck’s  version  being  soon  ready,  while  Piccinni’s  was  delayed  till 
1781.  This  masterpiece  crowned  his  success,  and  was  really  the  last,  for  his 
remaining  works  were  feeble.  His  health  began  to  break  and  his  last  years 
were  spent  quietly  at  Vienna.  After  his  death  in  1787,  Piccinni  vainly  tried  to 
collect  funds  to  establish  an  annual  concert  in  his  rival’s  memory. 

In  all,  Gluck  wrote  over  30  operas,  of  which  7 belong  to  the  epoch-making 
series.  His  other  works,  sacred  or  instrumental,  are  unimportant,  though  nei- 
ther few  nor  small. 

Personally,  he  was  impetuous  and  strong-willed,  though  a tactful  manager 
of  men.  Intellectually,  he  was  gifted  and  his  ideas  were  matured  by  careful 
study.  That  he  was  vain  of  his  talents  and  perhaps  miserly  with  his  wealth 
are  defects  not  always  absent  from  an  artistic  temperament. 

153.  The  Purpose  of  his  Innovations. — The  central  purpose  of 
Gluck’s  reaction  was  to  restore  to  the  opera  its  legitimate 
dramatic  truth  and  power.  This  involved  many  changes  from 
the  artificial  procedures  that  had  become  traditional,  and  a pro- 


GLUCK’S  OPERATIC  REFORM  363 

found  alteration  of  the  entire  spirit  in  which  both  the  composi- 
tion and  the  performance  of  a work  were  approached. 

For  example,  the  old  detached  overture  or  sinfonia  in  three 
movements  was  dropped  in  favor  of  a brief  introduction  suggest- 
ing the  leading  topics  and  sentiments  of  the  play  itself  and  pass- 
ing without  break  into  the  action.  The  chorus  was  freely  em- 
ployed as  a significant  element  in  the  vivid  depiction  of  situations 
and  as  a setting  for  individual  utterance.  Concerted  passages  of 
any  form  were  made  lawful,  if  demanded  by  the  plot,  especially  in 
the  building  up  of  climaxes.  All  the  old  rules  about  the  structure 
and  collocation  of  recitatives  and  arias  were  abrogated  as  rules, 
the  employment  of  such  formal  methods  being  determined  solely 
by  the  demands  of  the  drama.  Thus  the  text  was  elevated  to 
primary  importance.  Its  subject  and  disposition  were  estimated 
first  of  all  from  a dramatic  point  of  view,  and  literary  power  in 
it  became  indispensable.  The  personages  in  their  contrast  and 
interplay  were  studied  individually,  and  each  was  conceived  and 
treated  in  its  own  proper  quality.  The  details  of  expression 
were  then  elaborated  from  this  characterization  and  from  the 
development  of  the  situations.  At  this  point  Gluck’s  instinct 
saved  him  from  running  to  an  extreme  of  declamation.  Further- 
more, he  saw  clearly  that  the  opera  called  for  more  than  merely 
vocal  effects.  He  sought,  therefore,  to  raise  the  orchestra  from 
its  position  as  a mechanical  support  or  an  occasional  by-play 
into  a genuine  constituent  in  the  total  action,  assigning  to  it  a 
constant  part  in  suggesting  the  progress  of  sentiment  and  in 
heightening  the  emotional  effect.  Here  again,  his  instinct 
saved  him  from  falling  into  the  attempt  to  provide  merely  pic- 
torial effects. 

Theories  like  these  involved  a revolution  in  the  whole  process 
of  making  and  giving  operas.  The  librettist  must  be  both  poet 
and  dramatist.  The  composer  could  no  longer  turn  off  work  after 
work  with  clever  versatility,  but  must  immerse  himself  in  the 
atmosphere  of  each  new  play  and,  if  necessary,  be  ready  to  devise 
for  each  a new  method  of  expression.  The  entire  personnel  of 
performance  must  be  imbued  with  a new  spirit,  in  which  the  petty 
search  for  chances  of  personal  display  had  no  place.  And  even 
the  attitude  of  the  public  required  alteration,  so  that  the  hearer 
should  realize  that  the  opera  was  no  longer  a variegated  concert, 
but  a unified  and  dignified  piece  of  dramatic  art.  It  is  clear  that 


364 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


only  an  artist  of  experience  and  assured  standing,  of  strong  in- 
tellectuality and  genuine  musical  endowment,  and  of  indomitable 
moral  vigor,  could  have  hoped  alone  and  by  one  stroke,  as  it 
were,  to  accomplish  this  radical  departure  from  the  established 
traditions  of  the  great  Neapolitan  school.  Yet  such  an  artist 
Gluck  was,  and  his  honor  lies  not  so  much  in  his  theory  as  in 
his  absolute  success  in  bringing  it  to  realization. 

We  have  considerable  evidence  of  Gluck’s  theoretic  position  about  his 
work  in  the  prefaces  or  dedications  which  he  had  friends  prepare  for 
Alceste  (1769)  and  for  Paride  ed  Elena  (1770),  and  in  his  fairly  numerous 
and  extensive  letters.  He  sought  to  reason  out  a definite  system  of 
aesthetic  thought  as  applied  to  dramatic  music.  His  views  were  remarkably 
similar  to  those  of  the  Italian  scholar  Francesco  Algarotti,  whose  essay 
on  the  opera  was  first  published  in  1755  and  enlarged  in  1763,  and  which, 
therefore,  he  might  have  seen  (whether  he  had  actually  done  so  is  un- 
known). But  Gluck’s  theory  and  practice  do  not  wholly  correspond, 
showing  that  he  was  more  of  an  artist  than  a philosopher.  In  particular, 
his  musical  instinct  led  him  on  to  greater  lyric  exuberance  and  charm 
than  his  bare  theory  indicated,  so  that  the  result  was  not  simply  a slavish 
subordination  of  music  to  the  18th-century  conception  of  the  drama,  but 
an  organic  union  on  equal  terms  of  the  drama  and  music,  each  conceived 
with  artistic  freedom.  Hence  his  works  have  an  enduring  value. 

154.  Gluck’s  Immediate  Contemporaries.  — Here  is  an  appro- 
priate place  to  insert  some  account  of  several  workers  in  the  op- 
eratic field  who  were  not  closely  identified  either  with  Naples  on 
the  one  hand  or  with  Paris  on  the  other.  Gluck’s  reaction  was 
primarily  against  the  ideals  of  the  Neapolitans,  but  it  told  equally 
against  other  groups,  including  those  of  his  own  Vienna  and  of 
Venice.  With  these  representatives  of  northern  Italy  and  Austria 
may  well  be  included  the  few  Germans  who  came  into  operatic 
prominence  at  this  time.  Some  of  these,  with  the  Austrians, 
are  the  more  notable  because  they  had  some  share  in  the  early 
attempts  to  create  a Teutonic  type  of  opera  as  over  against  the 
prevailing  Italian  type. 

Giuseppe  Sarti  (d.  1802),  born  in  1729  at  Faenza,  studied  under  Martini  at 
Bologna,  and  made  his  operatic  debut  in  1752  with  such  success  that  almost 
at  once  a place  was  made  for  him  at  Copenhagen,  where  he  became  court-con- 
ductor and  was  honored  for  years.  In  1775  he  became  involved  in  a case  of 
bribery  and  was  banished.  After  teaching  at  Venice,  in  1779  he  was  made 
choirmaster  at  Milan,  whence  in  1784  he  went  to  a similar  post  at  St.  Peters- 
burg. Of  his  over  50  operas,  the  best  were  those  written  after  his  return  from 
Denmark,  such  as  Le  gelosie  villane  (1776,  Venice  ),  Achille  in  Sciro  (1781, 


GLUCK'S  CONTEMPORARIES 


365 


Florence),  Giulio  Sabitto  (1781,  Venice),  Le  nozze  di  Dorina  (1782,  Milan)  and 
Ar7nide  (1785,  St.  Petersburg).  He  also  wrote  considerable  sacred  music, 
especially  for  Russian  use.  Though  courteously  treated  by  Mozart,  he  in- 
dulged in  an  extraordinary  attack  upon  the  latter’s  quartets. 

Florian  Leopold  Gassmann  (d.  1774),  a Bohemian,  for  a time  a pupil  of 
Martini  and  then  in  the  service  of  a Venetian  noble,  in  1762  became  court- 
composer  and  conductor  at  Vienna,  there  producing  the  first  of  his  22  operas. 
Being  a favorite  of  Maria  Theresa,  in  1771  he  was  made  choirmaster,  succeed- 
ing Reutter,  and  head  of  the  Royal  Library.  He  wrote  also  for  the  church 
and  for  instruments. 

Joseph  Misliweczek  [Venatorini]  (d.  1781),  also  a Bohemian,  studied  at 
Prague  and  in  1760  published  his  first  symphonies.  From  1763  he  turned  to 
dramatic  music  under  Pescetti  at  Venice,  and  in  1764  wrote  II  Belter  of onte, 
achieving  instant  popularity  in  the  chief  Italian  cities.  In  all,  he  wrote  about 
30  operas,  which  were  generally  well  received.  He  had  a cordial  friendship 
with  Mozart. 

Karl  Ditters  von  Dittersdorf  (d.  1799),  born  in  1739  aQd  trained  at  Vienna 
under  Trani  and  Bonno,  made  his  first  reputation  as  a violinist  of  the  highest 
skill.  In  1765  he  followed  Michael  Haydn  at  Pressburg,  wherein  1767  his 
first  opera  was  given,  and  about  1770  entered  the  service  of  the  pleasure- 
loving  Bishop  of  Breslau  at  Johan nisberg.  He  became  a court-favorite  there 
and  at  Vienna,  where  he  often  appeared  as  an  opera-writer,  as  also  at  Berlin. 
From  1795,  his  patron  having  died,  he  was  befriended  by  a Bohemian  noble. 
He  was  an  abundant  writer  in  all  forms,  specially  famous  for  his  comic  operas 
and  singspiele,  mostly  in  German,  which  gave  an  important  stimulus  to  the  % 
national  drama.  The  more  noted  examples  belong  to  1786-8,  such  as  Doktor 
und  Apotheker  (which  is  still  given),  Der  Betrug  durch  Aberglaubeti , Die  Liebe 
int  Narrenhaus,  Hieronymus  Knicker,  Das  rote  Kdppchen.  Of  his  oratorios, 
Ester  (1773)  and  Giobbe  (1786)  are  still  extant.  He  also  wrote  over  no 
symphonies,  including  12  on  Ovid's  Metamorphoses  (1785),  many  concertos, 
quartets  and  piano-pieces.  His  brilliant  gifts  as  a composer  might  have  been 
more  telling  if  he  had  not  come  into  immediate  comparison  with  Haydn  and 
Mozart,  both  of  whom  were  his  personal  friends.  In  1770  the  Pope  made 
him  Knight  of  the  Golden  Spur,  and  in  1773  he  received  knighthood  from 
the  Emperor.  Just  before  his  death  he  dictated  an  interesting  autobiography. 

As  opera-writers,  Ditters,  Mozart  and  Haydn  were  almost  exactly  contem- 
poraneous. Mozart  must  be  separately  considered  (see  secs.  156-157). 
Haydn’s  efforts  in  this  field  were  inconspicuous,  though  not  without  merit 
(see  sec.  145).  Two  others  of  the  same  period  follow  : — 

Joseph  Schuster  (d.  1812),  the  fluent  composer  of  about  25  operas  (from 
1770)  and  much  other  music,  from  1772  was  in  high  favor  at  the  court  of 
Dresden.  He  was  trained  in  Italy,  partly  under  Martini,  was  honored  at 
Naples,  and  made  long  sojourns  in  Italian  cities,  writing  mostly  in  the  current 
Italian  style.  But  he  was  also  an  early  experimenter  with  German  opera. 

Antonio  Salieri  (d.  1825)  was  more  significant.  Born  near  Verona  in  1750, 
first  trained  at  Venice  and  from  1766  under  Gassmann  at  Vienna,  his  first 
opera  was  produced  there  in  1770,  followed  by  several  more  in  the  usual  Ital- 
ian manner.  In  1774  he  took  Gassmann’s  place  as  court-composer  and  in 


366 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


1788  Bonno’s  as  choirmaster,  acquiring  a unique  prestige  and  influence  which 
he  retained  for  a generation.  From  the  start  he  had  attracted  Gluck's  interest, 
became  his  pupil,  and  brought  out  Les  Danaides  (1784,  Paris)  under  the  shelter 
of  Gluck’s  name.  From  this  time  he  wrote  frequently  for  the  Vienna  stage 
and  occasionally  for  that  of  Paris,  as  Tar  are  (1787),  but  after  1792  produced 
few  new  operas.  Most  of  his  40  operas  were  very  successful  for  a time,  since 
they  were  less  strenuous  and  novel  than  Gluck’s.  His  relations  with  Mozart 
were  not  altogether  cordial,  and  he  is  supposed  to  have  stood  in  the  way  of 
the  latter’s  due  recognition  at  court.  His  long  career  made  him  an  interesting 
link  between  the  Haydn-Mozart  period  and  that  of  Beethoven  and  Schubert, 
both  of  whom  profited  by  his  advice  or  instruction. 

Matthias  Kamienski  (d.  1821),  born  in  Hungary  in  1834  and  educated  at 
Vienna,  settled  early  at  Warsaw,  becoming  the  first  composer  of  opera  in 
Polish  (from  1775). 

Vincenzo  Righini  (d.  1812),  a Bolognese,  and  pupil  of  Bernacchi  and  Martini, 
was  noted  first  as  a tenor  and  from  1776  as  an  opera-writer  at  Prague.  From 
1780  he  was  teaching  and  conducting  at  Vienna,  from  1788  was  choirmaster 
at  Mayence,  and  from  1793  at  Berlin  on  a large  salary.  His  originality  and 
vigor  were  slight,  but  several  of  his  20  operas  were  popular,  like  Tigrane 
( 1 799)  and  Gerusalemme  liber ata  (1802) . His  ablest  work  was  a Missa  solenne 
(1790). 

Petervon  Winter  (d.  1825),  was  born  at  Mannheim  ini754and  brought  up  there 
as  a violinist,  going  with  the  orchestra  to  Munich  in  1 778  and  becoming  in  1 788  its 
conductor.  He  was  a pupil  ofVogler  and  later  of  Salieri.  Beginning  opera-writ- 
ing as  early  as  1 776,  he  was  in  much  request  at  Munich,  Vienna,  Venice  and  many 
other  cities,  writing  in  all  some  40  entertaining  works,  most  of  them  originally 
in  German,  of  which  Das  unterbrochene  Opferfest  (1796,  Vienna)  and  Marie 
von  Montalban  (1798,  Munich)  were  the  most  famous.  Das  Labyrinth  (1794, 
Vienna)  is  on  a text  (by  Schikaneder)  which  is  a pendant  to  Mozart’s  Magic 
Flute.  He  disliked  clavier-composers,  and  early  took  a prejudice  to  Mozart 
that  he  often  expressed.  He  was  a prolific  sacred  and  instrumental  writer, 
leaving  many  oratorios  and  cantatas,  masses  and  motets,  and  several  sympho- 
nies, including  the  Schlacht-Symphonie  (1814)  for  chorus  and  orchestra.  He 
had  a certain  gift  for  choral  effects,  but  lacked  learning  and  inspiration. 

Vicente  Martin  y Solar  (d.  1810),  a Spaniard  who  made  a name  in  Flor- 
ence and  Turin  as  an  opera-writer  (from  1776),  went  thence  to  Vienna, 
where  for  a time  he  outshone  all  rivals,  even  Mozart  himself,  and  in  1788-1801 
was  in  honor  at  St.  Petersburg.  Of  his  about  20  comic  operas,  the  chief  were 
Una  cosa  rara  (1786)  and  D arbor  e di  Diana  (1787). 

Among  the  further  writers  appearing  before  1800,  several  are  named  under 
the  next  period  (see  Chapter  XXVI.). 

155.  Operatic  Progress  in  France.  — Just  after  1750  the  French 
musical  drama  entered  upon  a period  of  debate  and  contention 
that  was  extreme  enough  at  one  or  two  points  to  become  noto- 
rious. The  struggle  over  the  Buffonists  in  the  fifties  was  osten- 
sibly between  Italian  and  French  ideas  of  comic  opera,  and  the 


THE  FRENCH  OPERA 


367 


Piccinni-Gluck  quarrel  in  the  seventies  emphasized  the  contrast 
between  the  whole  body  of  Italian  and  French  conventions  and 
a new  dramatic  ideal.  Yet,  different  as  these  two  conflicts  were, 
they  were  both  symptomatic  of  large  differences  of  opinion. 

The  elements  involved  were  complex.  The  total  character 
and  tendency  of  the  Italian  type  of  opera  seria  as  represented 
by  the  Neapolitans  was  somewhat  opposed  by  the  specially 
French  type  as  developed  by  Lully  and  more  recently  by  Rameau, 
yet  in  both  the  aim  was  to  present  subjects  removed  from  the 
sphere  of  common  life  and  with  many  artificialities  of  dramatic 
treatment.  The  Italians  ran  to  an  excess  of  extravagant  lyricism, 
while  the  French  tended  to  too  much  mere  declamation.  Against 
all  this  the  rising  Italian  opera  buffa  was  a healthy  protest,  but 
its  broad  and  rough  hilarity  lacked  the  intellectual  wit  and  the 
dainty  handling  of  situations  that  the  French  genius  craved. 
Hence  one  of  the  first  products  of  discussion  was  the  French 
opera  comique,  which  was  a real  contribution  to  progress.  But 
hardly  had  this  begun  its  exhilarating  course  before  Gluck  ap- 
peared with  a total  renovation  of  the  operatic  ideal,  which  was 
destined  to  affect  both  serious  and  comic  styles.  The  effect  of 
Gluck’s  work  was  not  felt  in  full  force  during  the  18th  century, 
but  it  came  at  a time  when  the  reactions  between  the  opera  seria 
and  the  opera  buffa  had  progressed  far  enough  so  that  the  dis- 
tinctions between  them  were  breaking  down  and  that  a general 
advance  could  affect  them  both.  In  this  general  improvement 
the  work  of  Mozart  had  great  influence. 

The  chief  representatives  of  the  native  French  opera  comique 
were  Monsigny  and  Gretry,  and  of  the  later  period,  when  exten- 
sive amalgamations  of  contrasted  styles  took  place,  Cherubini, 
Mehul  and  Le  Sueur. 

Pierre  Montan  Berton  (d.  1780),  an  operatic  singer  at  Paris  as  early  as  1744 
and  from  1748  conductor  at  Bordeaux,  is  noteworthy  because  from  1759  for 
over  20  years  he  was  director  of  the  Paris  Opera  and  a useful  agent  in  the 
renovation  of  the  lyric  drama  in  Gluck’s  time.  He  himself  wrote  a few  operas 
(from  1755). 

Francois  Andre  Danican-Philidor  (d.  1795),  the  ablest  of  a famous  family 
(see  sec.  133),  was  a precocious  chess-player  of  international  renown.  In 
1759  he  suddenly  stepped  into  notice  as  a composer,  at  first  of  comic  opera. 
Till  about  1790  he  was  one  of  the  most  popular  of  French  writers,  excelling  in 
harmony  and  instrumentation,  though  not  specially  strong  melodically  or  dra- 
matically. Of  about  25  works,  the  best  wer zLemarechal  / 'err a?it  (1761),  Le 


368 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


sorcier  (1764),  Tom  Jones  (1765),  Ernelinde , (1767)  and  Persle  (1780).  He 
had  much  success  with  ensemble  numbers  — trios,  quartets,  septets,  etc. 

Pierre  Alexandre  Monsigny  (d.  1817),  born  in  1729,  in  youth  a self-trained 
violinist,  also  made  such  study  of  composition  that,  aroused  by  hearing  Pergo- 
lesi’s  La  serva  padrona,  he  suddenly  blossomed  in  1759  into  a writer  of  comic 
operas.  In  18  years  he  produced,  mainly  at  the  Comddie  Italienne,  about  a 
dozen  operas  with  augmenting  success,  among  the  last  and  best  being  Le 
deserteur  (1769),  La  belle  Ars'ene  (1 773)  and  Felix  (1 777).  His  gifts  were 
the  reverse  of  Philidor’s  — melodic  invention  and  dramatic  instinct,  but  little 
technical  or  structural  skill.  During  the  rest  of  his  life  he  wrote  no  more 
operas,  distrusting  his  power  of  further  creation.  He  long  held  a business 
office  under  the  Duke  of  Orleans,  was  inspector  at  the  Conservatoire  in  1800-2, 
and  followed  Gretry  as  an  Academician  in  1813. 

Francois  Joseph  Gossec  (d.  1829),  already  mentioned  (sec.  148)  as  important 
in  the  development  of  the  symphony,  was  born  in  Belgium  in  1734.  After 
training  at  Antwerp  as  a choirboy  and  violinist,  from  1751  he  had  success  at 
Paris  as  a player.  In  1761  he  entered  the  field  of  light  opera,  making  a hit  with 
Les  p&cheurs  (1766),  and  soon  undertook  grand  opera  in  rivalry  with  Gluck, 
writing  over  15  works  of  various  calibre.  He  also  wrote  some  oratorios,  much 
excellent  church  music,  including  a noted  Messe  des  Moris  (1760),  and  was 
one  of  the  few  musicians  of  the  Revolution  (festal  plays  and  songs,  1792-3). 
Except  in  his  instrumental  works,  Gossec  was  more  industrious  than  creative, 
but  he  secured  a position  of  great  influence,  which  he  used  for  wholesome 
results.  He  was  an  able  organizer,  setting  up  a new  orchestral  standard  from 
his  first  years  in  Paris,  founding  the  Concerts  des  amateurs  in  1770,  conduct- 
ing the  Concerts  spirituels  from  1773  and  also  as  deputy  at  the  Op£ra  in  1780-2, 
founding  the  Ecole  royale  du  chant  in  1784,  and  serving  from  1795  as  inspector 
in  the  later  Conservatoire  and  also  for  many  years  as  one  of  the  judges  of  new 
works  at  the  Op^ra. 

Andre  Ernest  Modeste  GrStry  (d.  1813)  was  the  most  conspicuous  figure  of 
the  period.  He  was  born  in  1741  at  Liege,  where  as  a boy  he  heard  some 
Italian  operas.  He  developed  his  evident  talent  there  and  from  1759  at  Rome, 
but  his  eagerness  to  compose  interfered  with  his  studiousness.  An  intermezzo 
of  his  was  given  at  Rome  in  1765,  and  his  first  French  comic  opera  at  Geneva 
in  1 767.  He  then  went  to  Paris  and,  after  producing  Zemire  et  Azor  (1771), 
entered  upon  a popularity  of  extraordinary  magnitude  that  lasted,  in  spite  of 
many  checks,  for  30  years.  Of  his  about  50  operas,  those  most  valued  were 
Le  tableau  parlant  (1769),  Liamant  jaloux  (1778),  La  caravane  du  Cairo 
(1783),  Fipreuve  villageoise  (1784),  and  especially  Richard  Coeur  de  Lion 
(1784).  His  forte  was  comedy,  if  not  cast  on  too  large  a scale.  He  had  a 
great  liking  for  musical  declamation  and  a certain  degree  of  melodic  power, 
and  his  dramatic  sense  was  excellent.  But  his  harmony  was  feeble  and  his 
instrumentation  thin,  though  not  inapt,  so  that  several  of  his  works  were  later 
reorchestrated  by  other  composers.  In  spite  of  his  defects  as  a musician, 
he  is  counted  as  the  founder  of  the  modern  French  comedy-opera,  and  in  his 
own  day  was  loaded  with  honors,  both  within  France  and  elsewhere.  He  was 
vain  of  his  successes  and  yet  understood  his  limitations.  He  wrote  some 
church  music  and  many  instrumental  pieces  (6  symphonies  as  early  as  1758), 


THE  FRENCH  OPERA  369 

besides  an  egotistic  work  on  declamation  (1789)  and  a feeble  manual  of 
harmony  (1801-2). 

Luigi  Cherubini  (d.  1842)  is  a difficult  figure  to  classify,  since  he  was  origi- 
nally an  Italian  of  the  Italians,  but  later  for  more  than  50  years  identified  with 
musical  progress  at  Paris,  since  he  was  most  influential  as  a church  composer, 
though  in  his  middle  life  (1780-1810)  chiefly  occupied  with  opera-writing,  and 
since,  finally,  the  type  of  his  genius  allied  him  more  with  the  best  of  the  Ger- 
mans than  with  either  Italy  or  France.  He  was  born  at  Florence  in  1760, 
where  he  was  first  trained  by  his  father,  who  was  cembalist  at  one  of  the 
theatres,  but  in  1778  went  to  Sarti  at  Bologna  and  was  carefully  instructed  in 
contrapuntal  traditions,  beginning  some  sacred  writing.  From  1780  he  wrote 
many  operas  in  the  prevalent  Italian  style,  so  that  he  is  commonly  ranked 
among  the  Neapolitans,  though  working  in  northern  Italy.  After  a sojourn 
in  London  (1784-5),  he  went  to  Paris.  Here,  under  the  influence  especially 
of  Gluck's  innovations,  his  operatic  style  was  profoundly  changed,  becoming 
far  richer,  more  dignified  and  more  warmly  dramatic,  and  he  established  him- 
self as  one  of  the  ablest  leaders  in  French  opera.  In  1795  he  was  made  one 
of  the  inspectors  at  the  new  Conservatoire,  but  later,  under  Napoleon,  was  in 
less  favor,  so  that  for  a brief  time  he  betook  himself  to  Vienna  (1805-6). 
Returning  to  France,  he  gradually  resumed  the  writing  of  church  music, 
though  not  entirely  retiring  from  the  opera.  In  1815  he  paid  a notable  visit 
to  London.  From  1816  he  was  professor  of  composition  at  the  Conservatoire, 
and  from  1821  its  director,  continuing  in  active  service  till  the  year  before  his 
death.  Of  his  almost  30  dramatic  works  the  more  celebrated  were  Ifigetiia  in 
Aulide  (1788,  Turin),  Lodo'iska  (1791?  Paris),  Medee  (1797),  Les  deux  jour  nees , 
called  Der  Wassertrager  in  Germany  (1800),  Atiacreon  (1803)  and  Faniska 
(1806,  Vienna).  Hardly  any  of  his  operas  rest  upon  good  librettos,  except 
Les  deux  journees , and  this  had  much  to  do  with  their  lack  of  p?rmanent  suc- 
cess. Another  blemish  is  that  the  wealth  of  musical  ideas  in  them  is  often  too 
abundant,  so  that  scenes  are  too  much  prolonged  and  in  some  cases  the  whole 
work.  But  many  of  the  overtures  are  classic  masterpieces,  and  the  refinement 
of  the  themes  and  the  originality  of  the  instrumentation  are  widely  acknowl- 
edged. It  is  notable  that  in  Les  deux  jour?iees  the  Italian  traditions  are  com- 
pletely deserted,  in  that  there  are  practically  none  but  concerted  or  chorus 
numbers  throughout.  In  spite  of  all  qualifications,  Cherubini  must  be  con- 
sidered one  of  the  most  potent  influences,  with  those  of  Gluck  and  Mozart,  in 
the  essential  renovation  of  the  opera  upon  modern  lines.  (For  reference  to 
his  work  in  sacred  music,  see  sec.  163.) 

Etienne  Nicholas  Mehul  (d.  1817),  born  in  1763  in  northeastern  France 
and  receiving  his  direction  as  a musician  there  and  at  Paris,  under  the  per- 
sonal guidance  of  Gluck,  is  still  more  a link  between  the  older  French  opera 
and  that  of  the  19th  century.  He  began  organ-playing  at  10  and  sacred  com- 
position soon  after.  In  1778  he  went  to  Paris,  where  the  hearing  of  Gluck’s 
masterpiece  in  1779  and  the  latter’s  advice  led  him  to  undertake  opera,  though 
his  first  work  was  not  given  till  1791.  In  spite  of  the  political  disorders,  he 
scored  a series  of  successes  and  speedily  became  one  of  the  most  admired 
composers  of  the  time.  In  1795  he  was  made  an  inspector  at  the  new  Con- 
servatoire and  also  an  Academician.  From  his  more  than  30  operas,  leading 


2 6 


3;o 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


examples  are  Stratonice  (1792),  Melidore  et  Phrosine  (1795),  Adrien  (1799), 
Uthal  (1806),  Joseph  (180 7)  and  La  journie  aux  aventures  (1816).  He  had 
an  exquisite  tastefulness,  a quick  and  versatile  imagination,  and  a keen  appreci- 
ation of  whatever  gives  local  color.  Some  of  his  large  effects  were  broad  and 
grand,  his  recitatives  were  often  nobly  expressive,  some  of  his  arias  excel  in 
tragic  or  passionate  quality,  and  he  handled  the  chorus  and  the  orchestra  with 
originality  and  force.  Some  of  his  overtures  surpassed  those  of  all  preceding 
writers,  and  he  introduced  many  unheard-of  instrumental  effects.  But  he  could 
not  compete  with  Cherubini  in  technical  learning  or  usually  in  capacity  for 
sustained  effort.  Outside  of  his  operas,  he  left  nothing  of  special  importance. 
But  in  opera  he  pointed  the  way  for  the  best  writers  of  the  next  period. 

Passing  mention  may  be  made  of  Louis  Emmanuel  Jadin  (d.  1853),  with 
about  40  dramas  (from  1788)  and  much  instrumental  music;  Jean  Pierre 
Soli6  (d.  1812),  a remarkable  baritone,  with  about  30  operettas  (from  1790), 
such  as  Le  secret  (1796)  and  Le  chapitre  second  (1799)  ; and  Pierre  Gaveaux 
(d.  1825),  also  with  about  30(1792-1811),  such  as  Le  petit  tnatelot  (1796)  and 
Leonore  (1798)  — the  latter  on  the  same  story  as  Beethoven’s  Fidelio. 

Jean  Francois  Le  Sueur  (d.  1837),  born  in  1760,  was  first  a choirboy  at 
Amiens.  Till  his  thirtieth  year  he  was  busy  with  church  music  at  Seez,  Dijon, 
Mans,  Tours  and  Paris  (from  1786  at  Notre  Dame),  with  finally  the  avowed 
intention  of  introducing  freely  into  it  dramatic  and  picturesque  effects,  both 
vocal  and  orchestral.  In  1789  he  retired  for  general  composition  and  in  1793 
produced  his  first  opera  with  great  applause.  He  was  inspector  at  the  Con- 
servatoire in  1795-1802,  being  finally  thrown  out  by  a quarrel,  and  from  1804 
became  private  choirmaster  to  Napoleon,  continuing  under  the  later  rdgime 
till  1830.  He  was  one  of  the  Opera  judges  in  1806-24,  and  from  1817  pro- 
fessor at  the  Conservatoire,  besides  receiving  other  honors.  Among  his 
about  10  operas,  the  most  noted  were  La  caver?ie  (1793)  and  Les  bardes 
(1804),  and  he  also  wrote  a number  of  oratorios  and  much  church  music. 
As  an  opera-writer,  he  had  no  such  imagination  as  Mehul  or  such  technical 
equipment  as  Cherubini  and,  in  spite  of  his  date,  belonged  to  the  1 8th  cen- 
tury, though  he  sought  eagerly  for  novelty.  His  lectures  were  popular  and  he 
had  many  distinguished  pupils,  among  them  Berlioz,  whom  he  foreshadowed. 
His  innovating  ideas  were  much  combatted,  and  he  wrote  often  in  their  de- 
fense (from  1787). 


CHAPTER  XXI 


MOZART  AND  THE  EXALTATION  OF  MELODY 

156.  Mozart’s  Unique  Position.  — Mozart  was  born  almost  a 
quarter-century  after  Haydn,  and  lived  less  than  half  as  long, 
so  that  he  died  before  Haydn  had  reached  the  acme  of  his 
power.  Yet  he  developed  so  rapidly  and  phenomenally  as 
to  outrun  Haydn  and  to  force  him  to  new  efforts.  Thus,  in 
spite  of  the  difference  in  age,  the  two  wrought  side  by  side,  and, 
as  regards  the  establishment  of  the  homophonic  sonata  and 
symphony,  the  period  is  rightly  known  as  that  of  Haydn  and 
Mozart. 

But  Mozart’s  genius  was  many-sided,  much  more  so  than 
Haydn’s.  In  particular,  it  included,  even  from  early  years,  an 
intense  interest  in  the  musical  drama,  with  a ready  sensitiveness 
to  the  most  progressive  tendencies  of  the  age  in  this  field. 
Mozart’s  strongest  period  followed  immediately  upon  Gluck’s 
triumph,  and,  since  he  was  personally  in  touch  with  the  whole 
controversy,  both  at  Vienna  and  at  Paris,  he  was  bound  to  share 
in  the  new  views  and  ambitions.  Like  Gluck,  he  had  already 
had  a wide  cosmopolitan  experience  and  was  at  home  in  all  the 
leading  operatic  styles,  Italian,  Austrian  and  French.  He  was 
not  specially  a student  or  philosophical  analyst,  but  he  had 
keen  intuition  and  quick  versatility.  Hence  it  is  not  strange 
that  from  about  1780  he  stepped  into  a real  companionship 
with  Gluck  (more  than  forty  years  his  senior)  and  that,  as 
regards  the  renovation  of  the  opera,  the  period  is  further  called 
that  of  Gluck  and  Mozart.  This  is  the  more  fitting  because 
Mozart  excelled  Gluck  in  both  the  variety  and  the  absolute 
musical  value  of  his  methods. 

Again,  Mozart  had  been  trained  as  a virtuoso  on  both  the 
violin  and  the  clavier.  He  was  quick  to  perceive  the  latent 
capacities  of  the  developing  pianoforte.  While  the  number  of 
his  larger  and  abler  works  for  the  latter  is  not  large,  it  is  only 
fair  to  recognize  his  kinship  in  a limited  sense  with  the  new 

371 


372 


THE  I.ATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


school  of  pianists  of  which  the  young  Beethoven  was  already 
showing  himself  a leader. 

In  spite  of  the  pathetic  brevity  of  his  life  and  the  still  more 
pathetic  failure  of  suitable  opportunity  in  it,  Mozart  stands  out 
as  one  of  the  most  striking  instances  of  the  intuitive  grasp  and 
abounding  inspiration  of  pure  genius.  Even  from  his  boyhood, 
he  needed  but  the  call  of  an  occasion  to  bring  before  him  both 
the  appropriate  method  of  procedure  and  the  musical  ideas  to 
be  expressed.  His  marvelous  natural  gifts  were  broadly  de- 
veloped by  the  exacting  discipline  and  the  wide  chances  for 
travel  provided  by  his  wise  and  energetic  father.  In  spite  of 
the  fact  that  he  was  cut  off  in  early  manhood,  he  went 
further  than  all  his  contemporaries  in  indicating  the  great  paths 
of  growth  upon  which  the  coming  century  was  to  set  forth. 

Wolfgang  Amadeus  Mozart  (d.  1791)  was  born  in  1756  at  Salzburg,  the  sec- 
ond of  the  two  surviving  children  of  Leopold  Mozart,  the  violinist  and  com- 
poser (see  sec.  149).  He  was  five  years 
younger  than  Maria  Anna  Mozart  (d. 
1829),  who  was  his  companion-artist 
throughout  his  early  life.  Both  were 
precocious,  Wolfgang  beginning  to 
pick  out  intervals  on  the  clavier  at  3, 
to  play  little  pieces  at  4,  to  compose  in 
form  at  5,  to  read  violin-music  in  trio 
at  sight  and  perform  in  public  before 
he  was  6,  and  to  play  the  organ  be- 
tween 6 and  7.  Before  he  was  10  he 
was  said  to  have  been  able  to  play  at 
sight  anything  for  either  clavier,  organ 
or  violin.  At  7 his  first  sonatas  were 
published,  at  8 he  wrote  his  first  sym- 
phony, at  9 for  a test  produced  two  Ital- 
ian arias,  at  10  similarly  one  act  of  an 
oratorio,  at  1 1 a musical  comedy,  at  1 2 
his  first  full  opera,  and  at  14  a grand 
opera  at  Milan,  besides  demonstrating  power  in  fugue-writing.  This  amazing 
readiness  was  wholly  natural,  coexisting  with  a perfect  boyishness  otherwise. 
It  was  guided  with  the  utmost  care  and  even  some  sternness  by  his  father, 
who  early  divined  his  son’s  true  rank  and  devised  the  plans  for  his  systematic 
development  which  were  carried  forward  with  infinite  self-sacrifice  until  after 
1780. 

Apart  from  home  instruction,  Mozart’s  education  was  principally  effected  by 
a series  of  journeys  planned  by  his  father  with  the  minutest  care  and  carried 
out  (until  1775)  under  his  personal  direction.  Thus,  during  the  19  years  be- 
fore he  was  25,  Mozart  was  away  from  Salzburg  over  ten  times  for  periods  vary- 


MOZART 


373 


ing  from  a few  weeks  up  to  more  than  three  years  and  aggregating  about  nine 
years  in  all.  The  chief  objective  of  the  first  trip  (1762)  was  Munich,  of  the 
second  (1762-3)  Vienna,  of  the  third  (1763-6)  Munich,  Stuttgart,  the  Rhine 
from  Heidelberg  to  Cologne,  Paris  (via  Brussels),  London,  the  Low  Countries, 
Paris  again,  Lyons,  Switzerland  and  Munich  again,  of  the  fourth  (1767-8) 
Vienna,  of  the  fifth  (1769-71)  all  the  chief  Italian  cities,  from  Milan  to  Naples, 
of  the  sixth  (1771)  and  seventh  (1772-3)  Milan,  of  the  eighth  (1773)  Vienna, 
of  the  ninth  (1774-5)  Munich,  of  the  tenth  (1777-9)  Munich,  Mannheim  and 
Paris,  returning  in  reverse  order,  and  of  the  eleventh  (1780-1)  Munich.  The 
father’s  purpose  was  to  make  known  his  son’s  genius,  to  secure  money,  to 
acquaint  him  with  musicians  of  all  schools  and  with  all  prevalent  styles,  to 
attract  to  him  the  indispensable  attention  of  wealthy  patrons,  especially  at  the 
courts  where  music  was  emphasized,  to  find  opportunities  for  conspicuous  and 
remunerative  composition,  and,  in  the  end,  to  win  for  him  some  distinguished 
post  commensurate  with  his  abilities.  The  youth  was  presented  everywhere 
as  an  incipient  master,  and,  though  he  did  receive  some  lessons  and  much  help- 
ful suggestion,  especially  on  the  third  and  fifth  trips,  he  was  generally  accepted 
as  a competitor  on  equal  terms  with  other  artists.  The  number  of  famous 
and  talented  singers,  players  and  composers  whom  he  met,  often  intimately, 
was  enormous,  and  the  social  interest  he  excited  was  phenomenal.  But  the 
expenses  of  these  experiences  were  heavy  and  ultimately  forced  the  father  into 
serious  debt.  And  the  son  was  volatile,  fond  of  bright  and  witty  society,  and 
liable  to  forget  his  ‘ mission  ’ in  the  pleasures  of  the  moment  or  to  sacrifice 
large  aims  to  petty  impulses. 

No  full  summary  is  possible  of  the  infinitely  varied  artistic  influences  to 
which  Mozart  was  subjected  during  these  formative  years,  but  a few  salient 
points  may  be  named.  In  Salzburg  there  was  little  stimulating  or  agreeable, 
though  there  were  a few  good  musicians,  like  Michael  Haydn.  At  London 
(1764-5)  much  close  intimacy  with  Christian  Bach  seems  to  have  given  him  a 
decided  impetus.  At  Vienna  (1768)  he  heard  Gluck’s  Alceste  just  as  he  was 
writing  his  own  first  extended  opera,  though  then  he  probably  had  no  real 
sense  of  Gluck’s  innovating  aim.  At  Bologna  (1770)  he  roused  the  enthusiasm 
of  the  veteran  Martini  and  learned  much  from  him.  During  the  Italian  tour 
generally  he  heard  representative  works  of  the  Neapolitan  order,  including 
some  by  Jommelli  and  Hasse.  At  Augsburg  (1 777)  he  first  saw  the  possibili- 
ties of  the  pianoforte,  as  revealed  in  the  instruments  of  Stein.  At  Mannheim 
( 1 778)  he  was  deeply  impressed  by  the  quality  of  the  famous  orchestra,  found 
numerous  congenial  artistic  friends,  like  Cannabich,  and  heard  much  to  awaken 
his  thought  regarding  German  opera.  Here,  too,  began  his  romantic  attach- 
ment to  the  young  soprano,  Aloysia  Weber,  which  alarmed  his  father,  delayed 
and  disarranged  his  tour,  and  ended  only  the  next  year  in  complete  disap- 
pointment. In  Paris  (1778)  he  stood  by  during  the  thick  of  the  Gluck-Piccinni 
quarrel,  but  aimed  to  keep  out  of  it,  though  he  studied  attentively  the  operas 
of  both  composers  and  many  by  G retry  and  other  Frenchmen.  From  the 
start  his  strongest  bent  was  toward  dramatic  music.  Hence  his  eagerness  to 
master  the  vocal  and  instrumental  methods  of  the  opera  everywhere  and  the 
abandon  with  which  he  threw  himself  into  every  commission  that  offered.  Yet 
his  peculiar  relation  to  the  Archbishop  of  Salzburg  and  the  predilections  of  his 


374 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


father  led  also  to  fruitful  attention  to  Catholic  church  music.  And  the  whole 
spirit  of  the  time  moved  him  to  constant  effort  in  the  field  of  purely  instrumen- 
tal music.  Measured  by  achievements,  his  early  period  was  almost  equally 
significant  in  all  three  fields. 

The  family  fortunes  were  largely  dependent  upon  the  Archbishop,  in  whose 
sendee  Leopold  Mozart  had  been  since  1743.  The  earlier  prelate,  Sigismund, 
was  interested  in  music,  but  chiefly  on  its  sacred  side.  During  his  regime 
the  father  had  long  leaves  of  absence  and  the  son  some  recognition  at  court,  as 
in  1770,  when  he  was  made  concertmaster.  In  1771,  however,  Sigismund 
died  and  was  followed  by  Hieronymus,  a pig-headed,  mean-spirited  man,  de- 
tested by  his  subjects  and  disliked  by  his  equals.  Under  him  the  Mozarts 
were  systematically  snubbed  and  tantalized.  In  1778  Wolfgang  was  reluctantly 
reinstated  as  concertmaster,  but  in  1781,  at  Vienna,  he  was  dismissed  with 
gross  insults.  Thenceforward  he  was  thrown  on  his  own  resources. 

Trusting  to  his  eclat  in  high  society  in  Vienna,  Mozart  hoped  for  work  as 
teacher  and  composer  and  especially  desired  an  operatic  commission,  as  the 
Viennese  stage  was  then  probably  the  best  in  Enrope.  In  1782  his  second 
mature  opera,  Die  Entfuhrung. ; had  great  success.  But  the  Weber  family 
was  now  living  in  Vienna  and  he  had  become  engaged  to  Constanze,  a 
younger  sister  of  Aloysia.  Her  circumstances  at  home  led  to  a hasty  mar- 
riage, which,  though  in  itself  happy,  involved  innumerable  troubles,  for  the  wife 
had  neither  health  nor  skill  in  managing  and  the  husband  lacked  steadiness 
of  purpose  and  loved  gayety  overmuch.  He  was  drawn  hither  and  thither  by 
random  impulses,  often  suggested  by  indiscreet  or  designing  friends.  He 
gave  lessons  considerably,  as  to  young  Hummel  and  the  Englishman  Attwood, 
and  to  many  who  were  only  half  in  earnest.  He  often  appeared  as  a virtuoso 
and  always  with  great  applause.  The  sale  of  compositions  wfas  less  remuner- 
ative, especially  in  the  absence  of  copyright  protection.  He  had  many  friends 
and  became  infatuated  with  Freemasonry,  but  not  all  his  incessant  sociality 
was  judicious  or  beneficial.  His  aggregate  income  was  not  small,  as  then 
counted,  but  he  had  no  wit  for  economy,  indulged  in  many  follies,  and  fell 
deeper  and  deeper  into  debt.  The  last  ten  years  were  filled  with  a maze  of 
occupations,  great  and  small,  but  also  with  an  equal  maze  of  difficulties,  under 
wThich  at  last  his  health  gave  way.  He  had  a lingering  hope  for  some  court 
honor  — a hope  only  partially  met,  late  in  1787,  by  his  appointment  as  private 
musician  to  the  Emperor,  virtually  succeeding  Gluck,  though  at  less  than  half 
the  latter’s  salary.  In  1789  he  visited  Dresden,  Leipsic  and  Berlin,  where 
from  patriotic  motives  he  declined  an  offer  to  become  royal  choirmaster.  In 
1791  a conjunction  of  serious  strains  occasioned  the  brief,  fatal  illness.  The 
circumstances  of  his  death  and  burial  were  pathetic  in  the  extreme,  the  inter- 
ment being  in  the  common  grave  of  the  city  paupers.  A romantic  feature  of 
his  last  days  was  the  writing,  upon  a mysterious  commission  through  an 
anonymous  agent,  of  a Requiem  which  he  himself  believed  to  be  for  his  own 
funeral  and  of  which  the  true  history  was  not  known  in  full  till  about  a century 
later. 

Personally,  Mozart  was  exceedingly  vivacious,  versatile  and  fascinating, 
full  of  droll  humor,  fond  of  all  sorts  of  amusements,  but  capable,  too,  of  acute 
mental  judgments  and  of  noble  sentiments.  In  spite  of  his  father’s  fidelity, 


MOZART 


375 


his  character  lacked  poise  and  firmness  in  all  practical  matters,  and  to  this 
lack  is  due  the  tragic  contrast  between  his  transcendent  genius  and  his  utter 
failure  to  win  a place  suitable  to  his  powers. 

At  Mozart’s  death  his  widow  was  left  with  two  sons,  the  younger  only  four 
months  old.  After  serious  struggles  against  want,  which  involved  the  sale  of 
her  husband’s  manuscripts  and  the  giving  of  various  concerts,  in  1809  she  was 
married  to  G.  N.  von  Nissen  (d.  1826),  a Danish  official.  She  died  in  1842. 
Of  the  two  sons,  Karl  (d.  1859),  though  somewhat  trained  in  music,  first  en- 
gaged in  business  and  later  was  in  the  Austrian  civil  service  at  Milan ; while 
Wolfgang  Amadeus  (d.  1844),  after  study  with  Neukomm,  Albrechtsberger 
and  others,  appeared  as  a pianist  in  1805,  from  1814  was  conductor  at  Lem- 
berg, and  later  worked  at  Vienna. 

157.  His  Style  in  General. — Mozart’s  creative  power  was  first 
shown  in  published  works  in  his  seventh  year  (1763),  and  from 
1766  he  poured  forth  an  incessant  stream  of  works,  of  which,  how- 
ever, only  a small  part  were  published  during  his  life.  These 
works  belong  to  every  class  of  writing  then  cultivated,  and  many 
of  those  for  orchestra,  the  stage  or  the  church  were  extended  and 
elaborate.  The  total  number  was  over  a thousand.  Spontaneity 
and  versatility  were  obvious  traits  of  his  musical  mind.  He  com- 
posed with  rapidity  and  usually  with  absolute  certainty,  and  the 
freshness  of  his  invention  continued  unimpaired  to  the  end.  His 
intuition  as  to  style  and  method  was  phenomenal,  and  he  adapted 
himself  to  so  many  forms  that  it  is  not  easy  to  say  which  sup- 
plied the  norm  of  his  style.  Historically  his  influence  has  been 
greatest  in  the  orchestral  and  the  operatic  fields. 

The  standard  edition  of  his  works  (1876-86)  includes  about  35  songs, 
20  vocal  canons,  over  30  concert-arias,  several  part-songs,  much  church 
music,  including  1 5 masses,  many  motets  and  several  cantatas,  a consid- 
erable amount  of  piano  music,  including  17  sonatas  for  two  hands,  5 for 
four  hands,  etc.,  17  organ-sonatas,  much  chamber  music,  including  42 
violin-sonatas,  26  quartets,  10  quintets,  etc.,  many  concertos  for  piano, 
violin,  flute,  horn,  bassoon,  etc.,  manifold  works  for  orchestra,  including 
49  symphonies,  about  30  divertimenti,  etc.,  and  nearly  20  operas  and 
similar  works.  His  fame  as  an  epoch-making  genius  rests  mainly  upon 
certain  of  the  concertos,  the  later  of  the  symphonies  (see  sec.  148),  and 
the  chief  of  the  operas,  beginning  with  Idomeneo  in  1781  (see  below). 

Mozart  was  first  of  all  a melodist.  He  resembled  Haydn  in 
the  clarity  and  symmetry  of  his  themes,  but  his  conception  and 
expression  tended  always  toward  more  expansion  of  feeling,  a 
much  greater  flexibility  and  a more  glowing  beauty.  His 
idioms,  instead  of  resting  upon  the  artlessness  and  naivete  of 


376 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


the  folk-song,  have  the  fluency  and  amplitude  of  the  finest  ex- 
amples of  Italian  art.  In  this  he,  much  more  than  Haydn, 
showed  himself  the  inheritor  of  the  best  results  of  the  long  pe- 
riod during  which  the  art  of  song  had  been  studiously  advanced 
by  generations  of  opera-writers. 

As  a harmonist,  Mozart  marks  a decided  advance.  He  was 
absolutely  expert  in  all  the  procedures  commonly  used,  but  much 
more  ready  than  his  contemporaries  to  extend  them  to  new 
applications.  Many  passages  might  be  cited  to  show  his  pro- 
phetic grasp  of  principles  not  generally  recognized  till  the  early 
19th  century.  It  is  probably  true  that  much  that  we  usually 
credit  to  later  workers  was  really  present  in  germ  and  essence  in 
him.  This  is  one  reason  for  the  persistent  charm  of  many  of 
his  maturer  works  and  for  the  indebtedness  to  him  that  many 
later  masters  have  acknowledged. 

Again,  while  Mozart’s  style  was  prevailingly  homophonic  and 
harmonic,  he  was  also  an  accomplished  contrapuntist,  uniting 
with  the  solidity  and  soundness  of  the  older  traditions  a striking 
brilliance  and  beauty  of  total  impression  all  his  own.  Here,  as 
always  in  matters  of  form  and  disposition,  his  instinct  was 
unerring.  On  this  side  he  stands  as  the  type  of  the  whole 
classical  ideal  of  composition. 

He  had  the  singular  advantage  of  uniting  in  his  style  what 
had  been  learned  in  both  the  vocal  and  the  instrumental  fields, 
and  of  fusing  together  tendencies  that  had  been  developing 
separately.  He  was  himself  a skillful  singer,  violinist,  organist 
and  pianist.  He  was  almost  equally  fascinated  by  the  attrac- 
tions of  the  concert-stage,  with  its  opportunities  for  both  vocalist 
and  player,  of  the  operatic  arena,  with  its  still  greater  field  for 
intense  and  complicated  effect,  and  of  the  church  service,  with 
its  appeal  to  higher  feeling  by  less  sensational  methods.  His 
eminence  is  due  to  his  consummate  power  to  appreciate  and 
utilize  all  these  at  once.  And,  though  his  dominant  national 
spirit  was  clearly  German,  his  experience  in  all  parts  of  Europe 
had  been  so  wide  that  he  was  in  contact  with  all  the  diverse 
tendencies  at  work  in  the  South  and  the  West.  In  a peculiar  de- 
gree, therefore,  his  style  is  typical  of  the  whole  musical  situation 
as  it  stood  in  his  day,  and  of  the  very  best  in  it. 

Mozart’s  operas  exhibit  his  genius  more  fully  than  his  other 
works.  Their  general  style  varies  much,  according  to  the  sue- 


MOZART 


377 


cessive  influences  that  affected  him,  at  first  conforming  without 
much  revolt  to  the  conventions  of  the  Neapolitans,  then  being 
distinctly  influenced  by  Gluck’s  later  masterpieces,  and  finally 
catching  a fresh  flavor  from  the  newly-revived  German  singspiel. 
But  in  them  all,  especially  after  1781,  are  features  of  powerful 
originality.  Of  these  the  most  conspicuous  is  the  overflowing 
wealth  of  musical  charm  — lovely  melodies,  delicious  combina- 
tions of  movement,  form  and  color,  and  masterly  construction, 
both  vocal  and  instrumental.  The  opera  for  Mozart  was  first 
of  all  a musical  opportunity  of  the  highest  order.  Herein  he 
showed  his  kinship  with  the  strongest  of  his  Italian  prede- 
cessors, though  he  far  surpassed  them  in  abundance  and  rich- 
ness of  ideas.  But  he  also  resembled  Gluck  in  his  keen  sense 
of  dramatic  values.  Yet,  while  Gluck  strove  after  severely 
ideal  total  effects  with  a seriousness  that  verged  upon  austerity, 
Mozart’s  mind  fastened  rather  upon  the  finish  and  effectiveness 
of  single  scenes  and  passages,  and  preferred  the  light  and 
humorous.  Gluck’s  theory  centred  upon  the  intellectual  im- 
portance of  plot  and  text,  such  as  he  found  in  tragedies  upon 
Greek  themes,  while  Mozart  was  notoriously  reckless  about  his 
librettos,  sometimes  using  absolutely  preposterous  conglomera- 
tions. But  Mozart  was  singularly  felicitous  in  his  characteriza- 
tion of  personages,  however  senseless  in  themselves,  so  that 
several  of  them  stand  out  as  monumental  artistic  creations. 
And  his  capacity  for  sustaining  interest  and  building  it  up  into 
fine  climaxes  by  sheer  musical  skill  was  unique. 

Mozart’s  operas  fall  naturally  into  two  distinct  periods  — those  of  his 
youth,  beginning  with  La  finta  semplice  (1769,  Salzburg)  and  the  German 
operetta  Bastien  und Bastienne  (both  written  in  1768,  Vienna),  and  ending 
with  La  finta  giardiniera  and  II  re  pastore  (both  1775,  the  one  at  Munich, 
the  other  at  Salzburg)  ; and  those  of  his  maturity,  which  (including  seve- 
ral only  sketched)  numbered  at  least  ten.  Of  these  last  Idomeneo  (1781, 
Munich),  Die  Entfiuhrung  aus  dem  Serail  (1782,  Vienna),  Le  nozze  di 
Figaro  (1786,  Vienna),  Don  Giovatmi  (1787,  Prague)  and  Die  Zauber- 
flote  (1791,  Vienna)  were  much  the  strongest.  All  the  earlier  works,  with 
his  oratorio  La  Betulia  liber ata  (1771),  are  clearly  shaped  upon  current 
Italian  patterns,  with  the  exception  of  Bastien  und  Bastienne , which  is  a 
true  singspiel.  In  the  later  works  the  underlying  type  is  more  or  less 
definitely  Italian,  but  the  treatment  is  increasingly  original  and  free, 
certainly  until  the  climax  reached  in  Don  Giovanni.  The  influence 
of  Gluck  first  becomes  noticeable  in  Idomeneo.  Ideas  connected  with 
Freemasonry  play  a part  in  the  striking  romanticism  of  The  Magic  Flute. 


378 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


Among  the  celebrated  operatic  singers  of  the  age,  most  of  them  more  or 
less  connected  with  Mozart,  were  the  following:  — 

The  sopranos  included  from  about  1740  Regina  (Valentini)  Mingotti  (d. 
1807) ; from  1747  the  extraordinary  coloratura  artist  Catterina  Gabrielli 
(d.  1796)  ; from  1764  Lucrezia  Agujari  (Colla)  (d.  1783),  with  a range  to  c 
in  altissimo ; from  1768  the  Portuguese  Luiza  Rosa  de  Aguiar  Todi  (d.  1833)  5 
from  about  1770  Gertrud  Elisabeth  (Schmeling)  Mara  (d.  1833),  who  was 
probably  the  greatest  of  all;  from  1774  Francesca  Gabrielli  (d.  1795);  from 
1777  Antoinette  CScile  (Clavel)  ‘ Saint-Huberty 1 (d.  1812),  who  was  more 
actress  than  musician  ; from  1779  Brigitta  (Giorgi)  Banti  (d.  1806),  who  sang 
by  ear  only,  but  very  ably;  from  1782  Amalie  Julie  Candeille  (Simons)  (d. 
1834),  who  sang  only  in  France;  from  1782-3  Elizabeth  (Weichsel)  Billing- 
ton  (d.  1818),  who  was  famous  in  England  and  Italy ; and  from  1791  Margarete 
(Hamel)  Schick  (d.  1809),  who  was  known  only  in  Germany.  Mara  and 
Todi  gave  rise  to  a great  partisan  dispute  in  Paris. 

Prominent  among  the  evirati  from  1763  was  Giuseppe  Aprile  (d.  1814),  the 
composer  of  songs,  duets  and  solfeggi,  and  a good  teacher;  from  about  1769 
Gasparo  Pacchiarotti  (d.  1821);  from  1773  Luigi  Marchesi  (d.  1829);  and 
from  1783  Girolamo  Crescentini,  the  last  celebrated  artificial  soprano. 

Other  male  singers  were  from  1762  the  tenor  Valentin  Adamberger  (d.  1804)  ; 
from  1 772  the  great  bass  Ludwig  Fischer  (d.  1 825  ) ; from  1 780  the  tenor  Matteo 
Babbini  (d.  1816)  ; and  from  1783  the  tenor  Luigi  Bassi  (d.  1825). 

158.  The  Singspiel  and  the  Artistic  Song.  — In  the  early  18th 
century  the  German  singspiel  lay  almost  dormant,  but  from 
about  1 760  it  began  to  reappear  in  Germany  and  Austria  as  a 
popular  type  of  much  influence.  Its  cultivation  proceeded  from 
two  centres,  the  one  in  Saxony  and  Prussia,  the  other  at  Vienna. 
In  both  cases  it  was  obviously  stimulated  by  the  success  of  anal- 
ogous forms  elsewhere,  such  as  the  French  comic  operetta  and 
the  English  ballad-opera. 

The  singspiel  is  properly  a play  made  up  of  spoken  dialogue 
with  interspersed  solos,  duets  and  part-songs  in  a style  not  far 
away  from  the  folk-song  or  its  near  relatives.  Although  in 
nature  not  a consistent  musical  type,  it  was  capable  of  artistic 
unity  and  effectiveness.  Its  power  lay  in  its  simple  tunefulness 
and  its  ready  adaptation  to  comic  characters  and  scenes.  Its 
topics  were  nearly  always  taken  from  common  life  and  its  treat- 
ment filled  with  local  color.  Its  revival  was  one  symptom  of 
the  reaction  against  the  artificiality  of  the  Italian  opera,  and, 
being  taken  up  by  original  and  resourceful  writers,  who 
knew  how  to  appeal  to  the  popular  sentiment  of  northern  Eu- 
rope, it  exerted  a large  and  healthy  influence,  though  presently 
its  individuality  was  lost  in  the  rise  of  the  romantic  opera. 


THE  SINGSPIEL  AND  THE  SONG 


379 


Depending  for  its  musical  success  upon  the  abundant  use  of 
simple  vocal  melody,  its  progress  was  closely  associated  with  the 
recognition  and  development  of  the  artistic  song  as  a distinct 
and  beautiful  branch  of  composition.  The  basal  type  was  the  true 
folk-song,  which  was  imitated  in  the  form  known  as  the  ‘ volks- 
thiimliches  lied,’  and  then  extended  by  natural  steps  of  unfold- 
ing to  the  longer  and  richer  forms  of  the  ‘ kunstlied,’  including 
the  dramatic  ballade.  In  this  way  it  helped  to  prepare  the  way 
for  one  of  the  most  significant  movements  of  the  early  19th 
century  (see  secs.  174,  222). 

In  the  North  German  group  were  the  following : — 

Johann  Adam  Hiller  (d.  1804)  was  not  only  a composer,  but  a useful  organ- 
izer, teacher  and  author.  Born  in  1728,  he  was  finely  educated  at  Gorlitz,  Dres- 
den and  Leipsic,  dividing  his  attention  between  law,  literature  and  music,  and 
settled  in  Leipsic.  In  1763  he  was  conductor  of  the  revived  public  concerts, 
edited  the  earliest  musical  weekly  (1766-70),  in  1771  founded  a singing-school, 
with  choral  concerts  after  1775,  in  1776  initiated  Concerts  spirituels  (name 
copied  from  Paris),  was  the  first  conductor  (1781-5)  at  the  afterwards  famous 
Gewandhaus,  and,  although  in  1786  he  moved  to  Breslau,  was  named  in  1789 
deputy  cantor  at  the  Thomasschule  and  in  1797  cantor.  His  singspiele  num- 
bered nearly  15,  beginning  with  additions  (11  songs  and  2 sinfonie)  to  Stand- 
fuss’  Der  Teufel  istlos  (1765  — original  work  about  10  years  earlier)  and  his 
own  Lisuart  und  Dariolette  (1766),  Lottchen  am  Hofe  (1767),  Die  Uebe  auf 
dem  Latide  (1769),  Der  Dorfbarbier  (1771)  and  Die  Jagd  (1771)  — the  last 
still  given.  These  owed  their  popularity  to  his  substantial  gifts  as  a writer  of 
true  songs  (lieder),  as  distinguished  from  the  pretentious  aria,  though  in 
applying  them  dramatically  he  often  discarded  the  simple  strophe-plan  and  even 
used  some  ensemble  numbers.  From  before  1760,  also,  he  composed  detached 
songs,  secular  and  sacred,  with  several  secular  cantatas,  an  oratorio,  a Passion 
cantata,  church  music  and  some  instrumental  pieces.  He  edited  useful  col- 
lections, historical  and  pedagogical,  republished  important  sacred  works  (often 
with  unjustifiable  changes  of  text),  and  was  a striking  author  (see  sec.  165). 

Johann  Andr6  (d.  1799),  brought  up  in  the  silk  business,  turned  to  music 
about  1770.  From  1774  he  took  up  music-selling  at  Offenbach,  but  in  1777 
left  it  to  his  brother  and  became  conductor  at  a Berlin  theatre.  In  1784  he 
returned  to  Offenbach  and  built  up  a music-publishing  house  that  issued  about 
1200  works  before  1800  and  is  still  famous.  He  was  a good  pianist  and  the 
facile  composer  of  over  25  singspiele,  such  as  Der  Tdpfer  (1773),  Erwin  und 
Elmir e (1776?,  text  by  Goethe)  and  Die  Entfiihrung  aus  dem  Serail  (1781, 
same  subject,  but  not  same  text,  as  Mozart’s  opera  in  1782).  His  method 
was  like  Hiller’s,  but  more  exclusively  lyrical.  He  wrote  many  songs,  a few 
still  popular,  with  some  chamber  music.  He  was  perhaps  the  first  to  expand 
the  song  to  the  ‘ durchkomponierte  1 ballade  (as  Le?iore , 1775). 

Georg  Benda  (d.  1795),  the  brother  of  the  violinist  Franz  Benda,  after 
playing  in  a Berlin  orchestra,  moved  to  Gotha  in  1748,  becoming  ducal  choir- 


38o 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


master.  His  melodrama  or  ‘duodrama’  Ariadne  auf  Naxos  (1774)  made  a 
sensation,  and  was  followed  by  nearly  15  other  stage-works,  including  the 
opera  Romeo  und  Julia  (1776),  the  melodrama  Medea  (1777?)  and  the 
‘monodrama1  Pygmalion  (1780).  The  text  of  these  melodramas  was  not 
sung,  but  spoken,  while  music  was  supplied  by  the  orchestra.  From  1778 
Benda  moved  from  place  to  place,  writing  many  church  works,  secular 
cantatas,  symphonies,  clavier-sonatas  and  concertos,  etc. 

Johann  Friedrich  Reichardt  (d.  1814)  was  early  taught  the  lute,  the  violin 
and  theory,  and  had  a good  general  education.  At  23  (1775)  he  became 
royal  choirmaster  at  Berlin,  succeeding  Agricola,  but  was  too  progessive  to  be 
wholly  popular  and  was  often  away,  chiefly  in  France  and  England.  In  1783 
he  established  Concerts  spirituels  at  Berlin.  In  1794  he  lost  his  place  because 
of  his  radical  politics.  From  1807  for  a time  he  was  choirmaster  to  Jerome 
Bonaparte  at  Cassel.  He  was  interested  in  new  ideas,  as  in  Gluck’s  innova- 
tions, and  had  decided  musical  gifts,  though  not  always  happy  in  their  use. 
He  wrote  over  20  stage-works,  including  singspiele  like  Hanschen  und 
Gretchen  (1773),  Jery  utid  Bately  (1789,  text  by  Goethe),  Erwin  und  Elmir e 
(J793),  and  several  operas,  mostly  for  Berlin,  with  two  for  Paris  (not  given)  ; 
also  very  many  fine  songs,  including  60  by  Goethe,  solo  cantatas  and  odes, 
a Passion  (1784),  psalms,  Te  Deums,  sacred  cantatas,  several  symphonies, 
including  the  Schlachtsytnphonie  (on  the  battle  of  Leipsic,  1813),  chamber 
music,  concertos  for  piano  and  for  violin,  etc.  As  a critic  he  was  fertile  and 
keen  (see  sec.  165). 

Johann  Abraham  Peter  Schulz  (d.  1800),  a pupil  and  later  the  assistant  of 
Kirnberger,  after  travel  as  tutor,  in  1773  settled  in  Berlin,  at  first  teaching 
and  collaborating  upon  Sulzer’s  ‘Theorie.1  From  1776  he  conducted  at  the 
French  Theatre,  from  1780  was  director  for  Prince  Heinrich  at  Rheinsberg, 
and  from  1787  choirmaster  at  Copenhagen,  resigning  in  1795  because  of  ill- 
health.  His  first  and  best  reputation  came  from  his  beautiful  Lieder  im 
Volkston  (1782-90),  but  he  also  wrote  about  10  successful  singspiele  and 
operas  (from  1775),  several  of  them  to  Danish  texts  and  produced  at  Copen- 
hagen, such  as  Alitie  (1789),  Hoest-Gildet  ( 1 790) , Peters  Bryllup  (1791),  etc. 
His  sacred  songs,  cantatas,  Passions,  etc.,  were  many  and  popular. 

Johann  Rudolph  Zumsteeg  (d.  1802),  the  fellow-student  -of  Schiller  at 
Stuttgart,  at  first  destined  to  be  a sculptor,  was  formed  by  the  choirmaster 
Poli  into  a fine  ’cellist  and  song-writer,  succeeding  his  teacher  in  1792. 
He  wrote  several  singspiele  (from  about  1784),  like  Die  Geisterinsel , Das 
Pfauenfest,  Elbondokani  and  Zalaor , over  20  sacred  cantatas,  many  songs 
and  important  ballades,  dramatically  conceived  and  often  finely  set,  including 
Burger’s  Lenore  and  Die  Entfuhrung , Goethe’s  Colma , Schiller’s  Ode  an  die 
Freude , Maria  Stuart  (one  scene),  Johannen's  Lebewohl , with  Die  B'ussende , 
Des  Pfarrers  Tochter , Ritter  Toggenburg , etc.,  by  lesser  poets.  In  these 
he  was  the  precursor  of  Schubert  and  Lowe. 

Less  important  were  Franz  Andreas  Holly  (d.  1783),  with  about  15  singspiele 
(from  about  1768)  ; Christian  Gottlob  Neefe  (d.  1798),  long  associated  with 
Hiller  at  Leipsic  and  from  1781  organist  at  Bonn,  with  many  melodious 
works,  including  singspiele  (from  1772)  ; Karl  David  Stegmann  (d.  1826),  a 
ginger  and  playwright,  chiefly  at  Hamburg,  with  over  10  singspiele  (from  1 773), 


THE  SINGSPIEL  AND  THE  SONG 


381 


songs  and  instrumental  pieces;  and  Anton  Schweitzer  (d.  1787),  Benda’s 
successor  at  Gotha  in  1780,  with  about  a score  of  singspiele  (from  1773). 
Here  may  be  added  Johann  Franz  Xaver  Sterkel  (d.  1817),  from  1778  elec- 
toral chaplain  and  from  1793  choirmaster  at  Mayence,  the  composer  of  a 
great  number  of  songs  and  piano-works,  besides  10  symphonies,  etc.  As  a 
pianist  he  was  admired  by  Beethoven  in  1791. 

The  Vienna  group  of  singspiel-writers  was  at  first  more  limited  in  influ- 
ence, contributing  less  to  the  development  of  the  song  as  such  ; but,  on  the 
other  hand,  their  efforts  were  ultimately  valuable  in  helping  forward  the 
advent  of  true  German  opera. 

Joseph  Haydn  (d.  1809)  was  a pioneer,  though  not  an  important  one. 
His  Der  nene  krumtne  Teufel  (1751?)  and  the  marionette-plays  at  Esterhdz 
(1762)  belonged  to  the  singspiel  class  (see  sec.  145).  The  relation  of  the 
operas  of  Mozart  (d.  1791)  is  elsewhere  stated  (see  sec.  155),  especially  as 
regards  his  Bastien  und  Bastienne  (1768)  and  Die  Entfuhrung  (1782). 
Similarly,  the  works  of  their  contemporary  Ditters  (d.  1799)  are  certainly 
important  in  this  connection  (see  sec.  153). 

Ignaz  Umlauf  (d.  1796),  at  first  a viola -player,  was  from  1778  leader  at  the 
National  Theatre  at  Vienna,  and  from  1789  Salieri’s  assistant  at  the  Imperial 
Chapel,  besides  composing  for  the  German  Theatre.  His  Die  Bergknafpen 
(1778)  opened  a popular  series  of  which  Die  Apotheke  (1778),  Die  schone 
Schusterin  (1780),  Das  Irrlicht  and  others  were  examples. 

Johann  Schenk  (d.  1836)  secured  notice  by  his  boy-voice  and  became  a 
pupil  of  Wagenseil,  who  sought  to  form  him  as  a sacred  composer  in  the 
strict  contrapuntal  style.  A fine  mass  (1778)  was  specially  admired  and  fora 
time  he  pressed  on  in  church  music.  But  from  1785,  at  first  anonymously,  he 
took  up  dramatic  writing  in  folk-style,  achieving  such  success  that  he  forsook 
his  earlier  ambition.  Several  of  his  dozen  singspiele  long  held  the  stage, 
such  as  Die  Weinlese  (1785),  Die  IVeihnacht  auf  dem  Lande  (1786),  and 
especially  Der  Dor f bar  bier  (1796).  His  later  years  were  embittered  by  the 
lack  of  continued  success.  In  1793  he  acted  as  Beethoven’s  secret  helper 
with  the  latter’s  exercises  in  counterpoint  for  Haydn. 

Ferdinand  Kauer  (d.  1831),  born  in  Moravia,  from  1795  was  employed  in 
Vienna  theatres  as  leader  or  ’cellist,  always  poorly  paid,  even  when  his  works 
were  drawing  large  audiences.  He  was  extremely  prolific  in  composition  — 
about  200  singspiele  and  operas,  of  which  Das  Donauweibche?i  was  the  best, 
many  masses  and  other  church  music,  and  an  indefinite  number  of  instrumental 
works.  In  1830  most  of  his  MSS.  were  lost  in  an  inundation.  Wenzel 
Miiller  (d.  1835),  also  a Moravian,  a pupil  of  Ditters,  had  a similar  career, 
and  is  also  said  to  have  written  over  200  singspiele  and  similar  works  (from 
1783),  such  as  Der  Fagottist  (1792),  Das  Neusonntagskind  (1793),  etc. 
Franz  Xaver  Siissmayr  (d.  1803),  came  to  Vienna  about  1790  and  studied 
with  Mozart,  assisting  him  on  Titus  and  completing  the  score  of  the  Requiem. 
From  1792  he  was  leader  at  different  theatres  and  produced  singspiele,  like 
Der  Spiegel  von  Arkadien  (1794)  and  Soliman  II.  (1799),  besides  other 
works.  Ignaz  Walter  (d.  1822),  a Bohemian,  trained  at  Vienna,  worked  as 
singer  and  leader  there  and  at  Prague  till  about  1790,  when  he  went  to  Ger- 


382 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


many,  writing  several  singspiele  (from  about  1793),  such  as  Dr.  Faust  (179 7) 
and  Der  Spiegelritter  (1798),  besides  a coronation-cantata  (1790). 

Here  for  convenience  may  be  inserted  two  composers  who  were  influential 
upon  music  in  Scandanavia : — 

Friedrich  Ludwig  Aemilius  Kunzen  (d.  1817),  son  of  K.  A.  Kunzen  of 
Liibeck,  was  a cultivated  pianist,  who,  after  traveling  as  a virtuoso  and  short 
residences  at  Berlin  (collaborating  with  Reichardt),  Frankfort  and  Prague,  in 
1795  succeeded  Schulz  as  choirmaster  at  Copenhagen.  He  had  already  written 
one  Danish  opera,  Holger  Danske  (1789),  and  won  applause  by  his  Das  Fest 
der  Winzer  (1795,  Prague),  and  now  produced  a series  of  Danish  operas  and 
much  other  music,  which  not  only  placed  him  at  the  head  of  Danish  musicians, 
but  made  him  noted  elsewhere.  He  issued  a collection  of  Danish  songs 
(1816). 

Johann  Christian  Friedrich  Haffner  (d.  1833),  who  studied  at  Schmalkalden 
and  Leipsic,  went  to  Stockholm  in  1780  as  organist  and  assistant  at  the  opera, 
becoming  in  1794  royal  choirmaster,  but  removed  in  i8o8toUpsala  as  director 
and  organist  at  the  cathedral.  His  advancement  was  due  to  three  operas  in 
the  style  of  Gluck,  the  first  of  which  was  Electra  (1787),  but  he  later  became 
specially  interested  in  collecting  and  editing  Swedish  national  songs  and 
chorales  (from  1819). 

159.  Secular  Music  in  England.  — After  the  accession  of 
George  III.  (1760)  there  was  a notable  outburst  of  secular  music 
in  England,  taking  the  form  of  light  ‘ operas,’  part-songs,  glees 
and  ‘catches,’  detached  songs  or  ballads.  Comic  song-plays  or 
comedies  with  incidental  songs  were  exceedingly  popular  in 
London,  having  a vogue  like  that  of  analogous  forms  in  France 
and  Germany.  These  plays  stimulated  the  writing  of  detached 
songs,  but,  being  mostly  undertaken  by  writers  not  broadly 
trained  in  composition  and  surrounded  by  an  atmosphere  not 
artistically  musical,  had  little  intrinsic  value  or  beneficial  in- 
fluence. 

The  development  of  the  glee  or  unaccompanied  part-song, 
however,  was  characteristic  and  brilliant,  somewhat  recalling 
the  madrigal  period  of  a century  and  a half  before.  Writing 
of  this  sort  attracted  many  church  musicians,  who  brought  to  it 
disciplined  talent  and  often  delicate  and  original  sentiment. 
Some  of  these,  also,  were  producers  of  admirable  solo  songs. 

Among  the  able  church  composers  who  also  undertook  song-plays  and 
operas  were  Samuel  Arnold  (d.  1802),  who  at  23  (1763)  began  as  composer  at 
Covent  Garden,  writing  in  all  over  40  works,  mostly  comic,  the  first  being 
The  Maid  of  the  Mill  (1765),  which  was  largely  a pasticcio,  but  notable  as  the 
first  native  music-drama  since  Purcell ; William  Jackson  of  Exeter  (d.  1803), 
with  a few  stage-pieces  (1767-83),  including  The  Lord  of  the  Manor  (1780), 


ENGLISH  SONG-PLAYS  AND  GLEES 


383 


several  odes  and  many  songs  ; and,  much  later,  Thomas  Attwood  (d.  1838), 
the  eminent  organist  at  St.  Paul’s,  with  over  20  operettas  (1792-1807)  and 
many  fine  glees  and  songs. 

Charles  Dibdin  (d.  1814),  a Winchester  choirboy,  at  15  (1760)  went  to 
London  and  sought  dramatic  employment.  The  Shepherd's  Artifice  ( 1762), 
in  which  he  figured  as  author,  composer  and  actor-singer,  was  so  successful 
that  he  followed  it  up  with  about  70  others  (till  1798),  besides  30  musical 
monologues  — the  latter  containing  most  of  his  famous  sea -songs.  He  engaged 
in  several  speculations,  wrote  at  length  on  his  experiences  and  on  the  stage 
(1788-1803),  edited  a periodical  and  published  novels. 

Michael  Arne  (d.  1786),  the  son  of  T.  A.  Arne,  early  showed  talent  for 
stage-writing,  beginning  with  The  Fairy  Tale  (1763)  and  Alme?ia  (1764),  the 
latter  jointly  with  Battishill.  The  best  of  his  9 plays  was  Garrick’s  Cyrnon 

(■767)- 

Thomas  Linley,  Sr.  (d.  1795),  at  first  a singing-teacher  at  Bath  and  from 
1774  concert-conductor  at  London,  produced  over  10  song-plays  (1768-88), 
two  of  which  were  adapted  from  Gretry.  He  was  an  accomplished  writer  of 
songs  and  madrigals.  His  gifted  son,  Thomas  Linley.  Jr.  (d.  1778  at  22),  was 
Mozart’s  boyhood  friend. 

James  Hook  (d.  1827)  showed  enormous  fertility  in  some  2000  songs,  can- 
tatas, catches  and  the  like,  including  about  25  plays  (1771-1809),  many  odes, 
an  oratorio  (1776),  etc.;  Thomas  Carter  (d.  1804),  after  becoming  noted  for 
his  songs  at  Dublin,  produced  a number  of  song-plays  at  London  (1775-92)  ; 
Michael  Kelly  (d.  1826),  first  famous  as  a singer  in  Italy  and  at  Vienna,  produced 
over  60  song-plays  (from  1789)  ; and  William  Reeve  (d.  1815),  an  actor  and 
singer,  followed  with  about  40  (1791-181 1),  partly  in  conjunction  with 
Joseph  Mazzinghi  (d.1844). 

William  Shield  (d.  1829),  a viola-player,  came  to  London  in  1772,  was  long 
connected  with  prominent  theatres,  and  produced  nearly  40  plays  of  various 
degree  (1778-1807),  many  songs,  some  beautiful  in  simplicity,  some  full  of 
technical  difficulty,  and  part-songs.  From  1817  he  had  a court  position,  and 
at  his  death  was  buried  at  Westminster.  His  originality  as  a song-writer  is 
specially  noted. 

Stephen  Storace  (d.  1796  at  32)  was  a precocious  violinist  and  was  sent  as 
a boy  to  Naples  for  study.  At  22-3  (1785-6)  he  brought  out  two  operas  at 
Vienna,  and  knew  Mozart  well.  Returning  to  England,  he  quickly  produced 
almost  15  stage-works  (1788-96),  several  of  them  adapted  from  European 
singspiele,  but  including  his  own  The  Haunted  Tower  (1789),  The  Pirates 
(1792)  and  others.  His  sister,  Ann  Storace  (d.  1817),  his  companion  in  study 
and  travel,  was  a famous  soprano,  who,  after  success  in  Italy  and  at  Vienna, 
sang  in  opera  in  England  for  many  years. 

The  artistic  cultivation  of  part-songs  was  much  stimulated  by  the  found- 
ing in  1761  of  the  Catch  Club , still  a flourishing  institution.  Most  of  the 
famous  glee-writers  were  enrolled  in  this,  and  all  at  some  time  won  prizes 
in  its  annual  competitions.  A somewhat  similar  organization  was  the 
Glee  Club , founded  in  1787  and  disbanded  in  1857.  In  this  many  mem- 
bers of  the  Catch  Club  were  also  enrolled.  [The  term  4 catch  ’ originally 


3^4 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


meant  a round  or  canon  written  out  as  a single  melody,  but  came  to  be 
used  for  a variety  of  whimsical  and  comical  forms.  ‘ Glee,’  it  should  be 
noted,  means  simply  a song,  whether  gay  or  serious,  but  is  restricted  by 
usage  to  a part-song,  unaccompanied.]  Another  club  was  the  Madrigal 
Society , founded  in  1741,  devoted  to  a different  form  of  music,  but  includ- 
ing many  of  the  same  members  and  indirectly  conducive  to  the  same 
purposes. 

The  list  of  favorite  glee-writers  prior  to  1800  includes  the  following:  — 

Samuel  Webbe,  Sr.  (d.  1816),  was  the  most  active  of  the  circle,  winning  27 
medals  in  the  Catch  Club  trials  (1766-94)  and  publishing  9 collections  (1774- 
95).  His  ‘Glorious  Apollo,’  written  for  the  Glee  Club,  was  always  sung  at 
the  opening  of  its  meetings.  He  also  wrote  masses,  etc.,  for  the  Portuguese 
Chapel,  where  from  1776  he  was  organist,  music  for  the  English  service, 
2 secular  cantatas  and  some  solfeggi.  His  son,  Samuel  Webbe,  Jr.  (d.  1843), 
was  less  notable  along  the  same  lines. 

Benjamin  Cooke  (d.  1793),  pupil  of  Pepusch  and  in  1752  his  successor,  at 
12  (1746)  was  deputy  organist  at  Westminster  Abbey,  in  1757  choirmaster 
and  in  1762  organist.  He  was  highly  esteemed  as  a theorist.  His  church 
compositions  were  excellent,  but  not  many,  and  his  glees  are  famous  (2  col- 
lections, 1775,  ’95)-  His  son,  Robert  Cooke  (d.  1814),  followed  in  his  steps. 

John  Stafford  Smith  (d.  1826),  pupil  of  Boyce  and  Nares,  a leading  glee- 
writer  from  1773  and  Hawkins’  helper  on  his  ‘ History,’ entered  the  Chapel 
Royal  in  1784  and  succeeded  Arnold  as  organist  in  1802.  He  published  5 
collections  of  his  own  and  2 of  a valuable  historical  character  (1779,  1812). 

William  Hayes  (d.  1777)  and  his  son  Philip  Hayes  (d.  179 7),  both  as- 
sociated with  Oxford,  where  they  were  organists  and  professors,  publishing 
glees  of  value  (1757,  by  William,  and  about  1780-89,  by  Philip)  ; Jonathan 
Battishill  (d.  1801),  the  well-known  organist  and  anthem-writer,  with  2 
collections  of  glees;  the  Earl  of  Mornington  [G.  C.  Wellesley]  (d.  1781), 
a self-trained,  but  skillful  amateur  at  Dublin,  where  he  was  professor  (1764- 
74),  whose  glees  were  edited  by  Bishop  (1846);  Luffman  Atterbury  (d. 
1796)  of  the  Chapel  Royal,  with  more  than  one  collection  (from  1775?) 
and  an  oratorio  (1773)  ; Stephen  Paxton  (d.  1787),  with  2 collections  and 
some  masses;  John  Danby  (d.  1798),  organist  at  the  Spanish  Chapel,  with 
4 collections  (1785-98)  and  some  Catholic  music;  Richard  John  Samuel 
Stevens  (d.  1837),  from  1786  organist  at  the  Temple  Church  and  from  1801 
professor  at  Gresham  College,  witK  3 collections  and  a fine  edition  of  old 
church  music;  and  Reginald  Spofforth  (d.  1827),  with  one  collection,  — all 
these  rank  high. 

John  Wall  Callcott  (d.  1821)  was  the  most  fertile  of  the  list,  writing  glees, 
canons  and  catches  literally  by  hundreds,  many  of  them  winning  medals  from 
the  Catch  Club  (from  1785).  In  1791  he  had  lessons  from  Haydn.  From 
1789  he  served  as  organist,  mainly  at  an  Orphan  Asylum.  In  1807,  under 
the  strain  of  ten  years’  effort  to  compile  a musical  dictionary  and  of  an 
appointment  to  lecture  at  the  Royal  Institution,  he  became  insane.  His 
glees,  variously  published  during  his  life,  were  collected  by  Horsley  (1824). 


CHAPTER  XXII 


THE  RISE  OF  PIANISM.  SACRED  MUSIC 

160.  The  Improved  Piano.  — The  inevitable  connection  be- 
tween the  improvement  of  mechanical  implements  and  the 
advance  of  artistic  styles  is  finely  illustrated  by  the  reaction  of 
the  experiments  in  piano-making  from  about  1760  upon  the 
entire  character  of  keyboard  music.  Until  that  date  the  piano 
was  not  much  more  than  a curiosity.  Inventors  had  not  seri- 
ously attacked  its  mechanical  problems  and  players  found  it  less 
useful  than  the  powerful  harpsichords  that  were  common.  But 
the  political  disorders  in  central  Europe  about  1760  sent  many 
workmen  to  England  and  these,  apparently  stimulated  by  the 
influence  of  Christian  Bach,  began  a movement  for  better 
devices  that  had  important  sequels.  Somewhat  later  came  a 
new  interest  in  piano-making  in  Austria  and  Bavaria,  soon 
paralleled  also  in  France.  Between  1780  and  1790  competent 
instruments,  with  various  forms  of  action,  began  to  become 
fairly  plentiful,  and  before  1800  the  supremacy  of  the  harpsi- 
chord ceased. 

It  is  impossible  here  to  give  any  sufficient  account  of  the  gradual  process 
of  improvement  in  the  piano,  but  some  notes  upon  pioneers  will  be  useful. 

Christian  Ernst  Friederici  (d.  1779),  a Saxon  organ-builder,  is  commonly 
said  to  have  made  the  first  ‘square  ’ pianos,  perhaps  before  1760,  but  no 
example  remains.  He  was  taught  by  Silbermann. 

Johann  Zumpe,  a German  workman,  became  well  known  in  England  about 
1765  for  the  excellence  of  his  small  pianos.  These  had  a simple  and  fairly 
effective  action  in  which  the  hammer  was  thrown,  without  escapement,  by  a 
leather-headed  wire  jack  (popularly  called  ‘ the  old  man’s  head  ’)  and  the 
damper  lifted  by  another  (‘  the  mopstick’). 

Americus  Backers  (d.  c.  1 78 1 ),  a Dutchman  in  Tschudi’s  employ  at  London, 
soon  after  1770  developed  the  Cristofori  action  by  using  a jack  that  engages 
a shoulder  on  the  hammer-butt  and  1 escapes  ’ past  it,  the  movement  being 
regulated  by  a screw,  and  by  supplying  the  check  to  catch  the  recoil  of  the 
hammer.  This  action  was  the  germ  of  the  so-called  ‘ English  action,1  later 
developed  by  the  Stodarts  and  the  Broadwoods.  In  1786  John  Geib  invented 
the  ‘ hopper’  or  ‘underhammer’  in  place  of  the  fixed  jack. 

385 


2 c 


386 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


Fig.  97. — Diagram  of  Perfected  Cristofori  Action  (1720). 

FlG.  98.  — Diagram  of  Perfected  Viennese  Action  (c.  1802). 

Fig.  99.  — Diagram  of  Perfected  English  (Broadwood)  Action  (1880). 


Fig.  ioo.  — Glass  Harmonica. 


PIANO-MAKING  IN  ENGLAND  AND  AUSTRIA  387 


Burkhardt  Tschudi  (d.  1773),  from  about  1728  a harpsichord-maker  in 
London,  had  from  1761  a Scotch  employee,  John  Broadwood  (d.  1812),  who 
in  1769  became  his  son-in-law  and  in  1770  his  partner.  The  latter  succeeded 
to  the  business,  and  the  firm,  after  the  admission  of  two  sons  in  1795  and  1807, 
became  John  Broadwood  & Sons,  which  title  still  persists.  From  1773 
Broadwood  used  Zumpe’s  method  of  making  square  pianos  and  from  1 780  a 
model  of  his  own,  in  which  for  the  first  time  the  tuning-pins  were  placed  on 
the  left,  besides  from  1788  stretching  the  heavy  strings  over  a separate  bridge. 
He  was  the  first  to  apply  the  damper-pedal  and  the  ‘ soft  pedal  ’ substantially 
as  now. 

The  tendency  of  the  English  makers  was  toward  a somewhat 
stiff,  but  positive,  action,  and  a firm,  sonorous  tone.  Their 
standard  of  effect  was  the  harpsichord,  with  its  adaptation  to 
the  concert-stage  and  to  use  with  the  orchestra.  Ultimately, 
with  improvements  in  the  stringing,  the  hammers  and  the 
soundboard,  their  instruments  developed  a fine  capacity  for  a 
sustained  singing  tone.  Meanwhile,  in  Austria  another  line  of 
progress  began,  tending  toward  a lighter  action  and  a sweeter, 
more  delicate  tone.  The  effects  here  were  suggested  rather  by 
the  clavichord,  with  its  fitness  for  private  use  and  for  the  cham- 
ber ensemble.  This  type  proved  less  valuable  and  influential 
than  the  other,  but  served  to  differentiate  a significant  school 
of  pianists. 

Andreas  Stein  (d.  1792)  seems  to  have  been  the  restorer  of  piano-making 
in  Germany.  He  was  a leading  builder  of  organs  and  harpsichords,  at  work 
at  Augsburg  before  1777,  when  Mozart  first  tried  his  pianos.  His  action  was 
novel  in  that  the  hammer  is  reversed,  the  head  toward  the  front,  and  is 
carried  bodily  by  the  key-tail,  while  the  hammer-tail  ‘ escapes  ’ from  a notch  in 
a fixed  hopper  behind.  The  dampers  could  be  raised  by  a knee-lever  and  the 
keys  shifted  by  a pedal  for  u?ia  corda  effects.  The  practical  success  of  his 
instruments  led  Mozart  to  turn  to  the  piano. 

Nanette  Streicher  (d.  1833)  was  Stein’s  daughter,  a precocious  player  at  8 
(1777)  aQd  a capable  and  cultivated  woman.  She  inherited  the  business, 
which  she  moved  to  Vienna  and  managed  with  energy  for  over  40  years, 
partly  with  her  brother  Matthaus  and  later  with  her  husband,  Johann  Andreas 
Streicher,  and  their  son.  She  and  her  brother  greatly  improved  the  Stein 
action  and  became  the  founders  of  the  Viennese  type  of  construction.  She 
was  an  intimate  friend  of  Beethoven. 

SSbastien  Erard  (d.  1831),  a young  harpsichord-maker  from  Strassburg, 
made  the  first  French  piano  in  1777,  following  foreign  models.  He  and  his 
brother  were  opposed  for  a time  by  the  luthiers’  guild,  but  in  1785  received  a 
royal  permit  to  make  pianos  independently.  From  1786  Erard  lived  in 
London,  and  in  1796,  returning  to  Paris,  introduced  the  English  grand  action 
there.  His  own  important  improvements  in  both  the  piano  and  the  harp 
belong  to  the  next  period  (see  sec.  183). 


388 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


In  many  early  pianos  mechanical  devices  were  added  for  modifying  the 
quality  of  the  tones,  as  by  interposed  leather  strips  above  the  hammers, 
or  for  supplementing  them  by  independent  attachments  of  various  kinds. 

The  century  was  also  somewhat  prolific  of  experiments  with  peculiar 
keyboard  instruments  of  a different  type. 

The  most  prominent  of  these  was  the  ‘ harmonica,’  the  tones  of  which 
were  produced  by  friction  upon  glass  bowls.  Before  1750,  sets  of  bowls, 
tuned  by  placing  water  in  them,  were  played  by  means  of  the  moistened 
finger  (as  by  Gluck  at  London  in  1746),  but  Benjamin  Franklin  (d. 
1790),  while  in  London  in  1763,  greatly  improved  the  contrivance  by 
fixing  the  tune  wholly  by  the  size  of  the  bowls  and  mounting  them  on  a 
rotating  axis  with  the  lower  edges  in  water.  A keyboard  was  added  in 
1785-6  by  Hessel  and  Rollig.  Several  noted  players  appeared,  a 
method  was  issued  by  J.  C.  Muller  (1788),  and  considerable  special 
music  written  (as  by  Hasse,  Mozart,  Beethoven,  etc.).  Somewhat  re- 
lated instruments  were  Chladni’s  ‘euphon’  (1790)  and  1 clavicylinder  ’ 
(1799),  Leppich’s  i panmelodion  ’ (1810)  and  Buschmann’s  ‘uranion’ 
(1810). 

Various  efforts  were  made  to  perfect  a satisfactory  keyboard  viol, 
having  strings  sounded  by  friction,  as  by  Gleichmann  (1709),  Le  Voirs 
(1740),  Hohlfeld  (1754),  Garbrecht  (1790),  Mayer  (1795),  Kunze  (1799) 
and  Rollig  (1800),  but  without  significance. 

161.  The  Vienna  Pianists.  — Associated  with  the  Viennese 
pianos,  with  their  easy,  shallow  touch  and  their  rather  small, 
though  sensitive,  tone,  was  a school  of  composers  and  players  of 
which  Mozart  was  the  type.  In  writing  for  the  piano,  as  for 
the  clavichord,  he  selected  his  thematic  material  with  instinctive 
care  and  developed  it  with  exquisite  skill.  Essential  structure 
was  emphasized,  and  subsidiary  or  decorative  material  rigorously 
held  in  check.  In  playing,  Mozart  sought  for  an  unobtrusive 
and  strictly  controlled  style,  more  solicitous  about  precision, 
clarity  and  smoothness  than  sonority,  showy  rapidity  or  compli- 
cation of  effects.  Mechanism  of  execution  was  simply  the 
means  for  bringing  out  structural  values  in  the  composition. 
The  piano,  he  evidently  felt,  was  to  be  handled  with  caution 
and  restraint.  If  combined  with  other  instruments,  it  was  to  be 
merged  in  the  ensemble  rather  than  forced  into  extreme  promi- 
nence. 

The  forms  most  used  were  the  sonata,  the  chamber  trio, 
quartet  or  quintet,  and  the  concerto  — all  usually  developed  in 
three  movements.  The  variation  was  especially  popular  at  this 
period,  by  some  writers  cultivated  to  excess.  In  the  hands  of 
composers  not  gifted  in  invention  the  style  of  Mozart’s  day 


THE  VIENNA  PIANISTS 


389 


tended  toward  formality  and  mannerism,  and  to-day  it  seems 
somewhat  insipid.  But,  it  is  to  be  remembered,  the  practice  of 
extemporization  was  fairly  universal  and  was  carried  to  a pitch 
of  learning  and  dexterity  that  is  now  rare.  In  performances  of 
this  sort  every  device  of  development  was  often  utilized,  from 
the  set  variation  to  the  elaborate  polyphonic  fantasia  or  fugue. 
We  may  doubt,  therefore,  whether  extant  works  fully  represent 
the  accomplishments  of  the  time. 

The  traditions  of  this  school  of  composing  and  playing,  then, 
were  typically  those  of  the  classical  period  generally.  As  handed 
on  to  the  19th  century,  they  blended  beneficially  with  the  new 
tendencies  then  arising,  since  they  kept  in  view  the  need  of 
substantial  thematic  ideas  and  of  symmetry,  order  and  finish 
in  their  elaboration. 

No  attempt  will  here  be  made  to ’enumerate  the  line  of  able  clavier-players 
through  the  middle  of  the  18th  century.  Somewhat  famous  examples,  in 
addition  to  some  already  named,  were  Johann  Gottlieb  Goldberg  (d.  c.  1760?), 
about  1740  a pupil  of  Friedemann  Bach  and  his  father,  later  chamber  musi- 
cian to  Count  Br'uhl  at  Dresden,  who  was  an  amazing  improvisator  and  the 
composer  of  difficult  concertos,  sonatas,  preludes,  fugues,  etc. ; and  Johann 
Friedrich  Gottlieb  Beckmann  (d.  1792),  for  many  years  organist  at  Celle,  who 
also  excelled  in  extemporization  and  contrapuntal  work,  but  chose  a popu- 
lar style  in  his  sonatas  (from  1769)  and  single  or  double  concertos  (from  1779.) 

Mozart  (d.  1791)  secured  his  youthful  triumphs  (from  1762)  upon  the 
harpsichord  (see  secs.  156-157).  From  1777  he  turned  to  the  piano,  which  he 
learned  to  appreciate  at  Augsburg.  The  characteristics  of  the  instruments  at 
hand  combined  with  his  predilections  to  keep  his  style  smooth  and  objective, 
though  not  lacking  in  geniality  and  vivacity.  In  his  25  concertos  (mostly 
from  his  mature  period)  he  attained  one  of  his  highest  successes,  happily 
emphasizing  the  capacity  of  the  piano  for  melody,  and  welding  it  and  the 
orchestra  into  a beautiful  unity.  His  sonatas  were  generally  less  significant. 

Franz  Duschek  (d.  1799),  a pupil  of  Wagenseil,  from  1763  was  a teacher  at 
Prague,  where  he  and  his  talented  wife  became  leaders.  Besides  being  a fine 
player,  he  wrote  (from  1773)  several  concertos  and  sonatas  (mostly  in  MS.). 
The  Duscheks  were  ardent  admirers  of  Mozart  (from  1 777)  and  helped  to  his 
successes  at  Prague  in  1786-7. 

Anton  Eberl  (d.  1807),  a public  player  from  youth  and  an  opera-writer  at 
Vienna  at  16  (1782),  attracted  the  notice  of  Gluck  and  Mozart,  the  latter  of 
whom  he  imitated  so  well  that  his  works  were  passed  off  by  publishers  as 
Mozart’s.  In  1796  he  toured  with  Mozart’s  widow  and  then  spent  some  years 
at  St.  Petersburg.  His  works  (from  1792)  were  numerous  and  elaborate,  in- 
cluding many  concertos  and  chamber  pieces. 

Johann  Nepomuk  Hummel  (d.  1837)  as  a boy,  7-9  years  old  (1785-7),  wras 
a pupil  of  Mozart,  and,  after  tours  in  northwestern  Europe,  of  Albrechtsberger 


390 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


and  Salieri  (from  1793)-  He  was  intimate  with  Beethoven,  about  1807 
assisted  in  the  Esterhazy  establishment,  from  1811  taught  in  Vienna,  from 
1816  was  court-choirmaster  at  Stuttgart  and  from  1819  at  Weimar,  but  with 
frequent  absences.  His  works  numbered  about  125,  including  not  only  piano- 
sonatas,  concertos  and  ensemble  music  (notably  the  Septet,  Op.  74),  but  also 
several  masses  and  other  church  music  (still  used),  4 operas  and  other 
dramatic  music,  and  an  elaborate  piano-method  (1828).  Though  most  active 
after  1800,  his  style  allied  him  with  the  earlier  period.  His  playing  was  care- 
ful and  exact  in  form,  but  lacked  success  in  slow  movements.  As  a com- 
poser, he  followed  Mozart,  though  without  the  latter’s  richness  of  material. 
Yet  he  was  one  of  the  ablest  of  improvisators,  and  became  the  teacher  and 
inspirer  of  many  great  players. 

Other  important  members  of  the  Vienna  circle,  already  mentioned,  were 
Joseph  Haydn  (d.  1809),  Wanhal  (d.  1813)  and  Pleyel  (d.  1831). 

It  was  into  this  atmosphere  that  Beethoven  (d.  1827)  came  in  1792,  only  22 
years  old,  but  already  an  accomplished  virtuoso.  It  is  easy  to  understand 
what  a sensation  his  virile,  original  methods  of  interpretation  and  improvisa- 
tion occasioned.  From  that  time  he  was  wholly  identified  with  Vienna,  exert- 
ing a profound  immediate  influence  and  beginning  the  first  pianistic  epoch  of 
the  next  century  (see  next  sec.). 

162.  The  Clementi  School.  — Contemporaneous  with  the  fore- 
going group  was  another  that  took  its  impetus  from  the  Italian 
Clementi  and  found  its  favorite  implement  in  the  English  type 
of  piano,  with  its  deep  and  somewhat  stiff  action,  its  large  and 
vigorous  tone,  and  its  general  capacity  for  brilliant  and  massive 
effects.  Great  emphasis  was  put  upon  a ‘ singing  tone,’  con- 
ceived in  a sense  more  masculine  and  eminent  than  with  the 
Viennese,  a tone  that  could  even  dominate  in  the  orchestral 
ensemble.  Emphasis  also  fell  upon  the  studied  development  of 
octaves  and  chords,  passage-work  and  varied  figuration,  and 
every  sort  of  embellishment  peculiar  to  the  keyboard  — upon 
everything  by  which  the  individuality  and  power  of  the  new 
instrument  could  be  exhibited.  In  short,  this  group  displayed 
a strong  instinct  for  executive  virtuosity,  doubtless  often  in- 
dulged for  its  own  sake,  but  also  evinced  a growing  sense  of  how 
the  study  of  the  keyboard  might  react  upon  the  whole  theory  of 
composition,  bringing  in  novel  materials  and  idioms  of  expres- 
sion that  were  peculiarly  germane  to  the  piano.  Starting  from 
about  the  same  point  as  the  other  school,  these  players  went 
much  further  in  uncovering  the  latent  possibilities  of  the  instru- 
ment, in  seeking  after  means  for  dramatic,  intense  effect  and 
thus  in  making  their  playing  more  of  a self-expression.  The 


THE  CLEMENTI  SCHOOL 


391 


forms  used  were  nominally  the  same,  but  the  treatment  was  less 
academic  and  restrained.  Insensibly,  as  time  went  on,  the  old 
patterns  were  transformed  into  those  of  the  post-classical  and 
romantic  schools. 

It  must  be  conceded  that  the  general  style  here  in  view  was 
open  to  abuse  by  foolish  or  dishonest  artists.  But,  on  the 
other  hand,  its  early  evolution  was  mainly  directed  by  intelligent 
and  earnest  leaders,  and  the  critical  demands  that  it  was  obliged 
to  meet  were  usually  severe,  so  that  charlatanry  was  quickly 
detected.  The  custom  of  extemporization  was  a wholesome 
check  upon  empty  pretension. 

Upon  the  minute  studies  which  this  school  made  of  every 
aspect  of  executive  equipment  was  based  the  splendid  virtuosity 
of  the  19th  century.  Indeed,  in  this  direction  there  was  no  clear 
demarcation  between  the  two  centuries,  and  most  of  the  leading 
early  masters  worked  both  before  and  after  1800. 

Muzio  Clementi  (d.  1832),  born  in  1752  at  Rome,  was  first  trained  there  by 
church  musicians,  early  becoming  an  organist  and  a composer  in  the  contra- 
puntal style.  In  1766  his  remarkable  talent  attracted  notice  from  Peter 
Beckford,  an  Englishman,  who  took  him  to  London  for  further  education.  In 
1770  he  captured  the  public  by  his  phenomenal  playing,  in  1773  published 
important  sonatas,  and  from  1777  was  conductor  of  the  Italian  opera.  In  1781 
he  toured  as  a virtuoso  to  France  and  Austria,  at  Vienna  competing  brilliantly 
with  Mozart  (who  criticized  his  mechanicalness).  From  this  time,  probably 
owing  to  his  contact  with  Mozart,  his  style  acquired  more  feeling  and  a higher 
musicianship.  Except  for  a trip  to  Paris  in  1785,  he  remained  in  England  for 
20  years,  engrossed  in  many  activities,  among  them  a connection  with  instru- 
ment-making, etc.,  which  in  1798  led  to  the  founding  of  the  firm  of  Clementi 
& Co.  (later  Collard  & Collard).  Between  1802  and  ’io  he  made  several  tours, 
including  two  to  Russia,  and  in  1820-1  was  in  Leipsic.  His  activity  as  teacher, 
composer  and  business  man  continued  unabated  to  the  end.  He  wrote  almost 
wholly  for  the  piano  — about  100  sonatas,  nearly  half  of  them  for  the  piano 
with  other  instruments,  many  minor  pieces,  several  pedagogic  works,  chief  of 
which  was  the  famous  Gradns  (1817)  — but  also  some  good  symphonies.  His 
style  was  strictly  classical,  resourceful  and  full  of  nervous  energy.  He  made 
demands  upon  the  executant  which  are  felt  to  be  taxing  even  yet.  His  historic 
position  was  strategic,  since  he  lived  from  the  death  of  Bach  till  after  that  of 
Beethoven,  and  his  power  is  indicated  by  the  number  of  distinguished  pupils 
whom  he  trained,  and  by  the  fact  that  his  work  was  used  by  Beethoven  as  a 
corner-stone  for  his  own. 

Ludwig  van  Beethoven  (d.  1827),  born  and  brought  up  at  Bonn,  was  a 
phenomenal  player  from  early  years,  studying  under  Neefe,  the  court-organist, 
whose  deputy  he  was  at  11.  In  1787  he  visited  Vienna,  meeting  Mozart  and 
giving  signs  of  future  power.  In  1791  he  made  a short  tour  up  the  Rhine, 


392 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


especially  winning  notice  as  a wonderful  improvisator.  Late  in  1792  he  was 
sent  by  the  Elector  to  Vienna  and  the  first  striking  period  of  his  life  began 
(see  sec.  168).  The  points  to  be  here  observed  are  that  his  youthful  reputa- 
tion and  his  first  impression  at  Vienna  were  made  as  a pianist,  that  his  style 
was  formed  largely  upon  the  lines  of  dementi’s,  but  that  the  force  of  his 
genius  early  led  to  a highly  original  line  of  expression,  which  ultimately  began 
a new  epoch. 

Johann  Ladislaus  Dussek  (d.  1812),  born  in  Bohemia  in  1761,  was  another 
youthful  prodigy,  taking  up  the  piano  at  5 and  the  organ  at  9 under  Jesuit 
teachers  at  Iglau,  Kuttenberg  and  Prague.  With  an  Austrian  officer  as  patron, 
he  was  taken  to  the  Low  Countries  and  was  organist  at  several  places,  with  a 
short,  but  brilliant  career  as  player,  composer  and  teacher  at  Amsterdam  and 
The  Hague.  In  1783  he  studied  with  Emanuel  Bach  at  Hamburg  and  ap- 
peared at  Berlin.  For  a time  he  was  a leading  virtuoso  upon  Hessel’s  har- 
monica as  well  as  the  piano.  After  wide  tours,  he  lived  at  Paris  and  ten  years 
(1790-1800)  at  London,  where  he  was  intimate  with  Clementi.  Resuming  a 
roving  life,  he  was  connected  with  Prince  Louis  Ferdinand  (1803-6)  and  then 
dependent  on  a series  of  patrons,  the  last  being  Talleyrand.  He  wrote  about 
15  concertos,  over  50  solo  sonatas  and  80  with  violin,  several  trios,  etc.,  a 
large  quantity  of  minor  pieces,  including  rondos  and  variations,  with  consider- 
able church  music,  and  prepared  a piano-method  (about  1800).  His  Iilegie, 
op.  61,  after  Prince  Louis’  death  (1806),  the  Farewell , op.  44,  dedicated  to 
Clementi,  and  several  other  works,  are  still  well-known.  He  was  one  of  the 
promoters  of  the  true  ‘ singing  tone,’  had  an  overflowing  gift  of  melodic  inven- 
tion, and  was  original  in  harmony  and  in  form.  He  is  often  noted  as  the  first 
famous  Bohemian  musician. 

August  Eberhard  Miiller  (d.  1817),  a pupil  of  the  Biickeburg  Bach,  began 
touring  when  14  (1781),  playing  either  piano,  organ  or  flute.  From  1789  he 
was  organist  at  Magdeburg,  from  1794  first  flute  in  the  Leipsic  concert-orches- 
tra, as  well  as  organist  at  the  Nikolaikirche  and  Hiller’s  assistant  at  the 
Thomasschule,  in  1804  succeeding  him  as  cantor,  and  from  1810  court-choir- 
master at  Weimar.  He  wrote  concertos,  sonatas  and  smaller  works,  much 
music  for  the  flute  and  for  church  use,  some  songs  and  a singspiel,  besides 
editing  a favorite  piano-method  (1804,  revised  from  Lohlein)  and  preparing  a 
guide  to  Mozart’s  concertos  and  original  cadenzas  therefor. 

Johann  Baptist  Cramer  (d.  1858),  born  at  Mannheim  in  1771,  the  son  of  the 
violinist  Wilhelm  Cramer,  was  brought  up  in  London,  having  two  years  of 
lessons  with  Clementi.  He  made  his  ddbut  in  1781  and  from  1788  toured  on 
the  Continent,  meeting  Haydn  and  Beethoven.  The  latter  was  greatly  im- 
pressed with  his  ability  always.  In  1828  he  founded  the  publishing  firm  of 
Cramer  & Co.  at  London.  From  1835  to  ’45  he  lived  abroad,  at  Munich  and 
Paris.  He  wrote  7 fine  concertos,  over  100  sonatas,  many  shorter  pieces, 
several  sets  of  studies  and  a famous  method  (5  parts,  1846).  Though  his  life 
reached  beyond  1850,  bringing  him  into  contact  with  Liszt,  he  belonged  to  the 
early  age  of  pianism,  his  style  being  formed  upon  the  theory  and  practice  of 
the  1 8th  century.  He  laid  stress  upon  the  equal  development  of  the  two  hands, 
excelled  in  the  delivery  of  slow  movements,  and  was  a facile  and  learned  im- 
provisator, but  in  originality  did  not  match  Clementi  and  Dussek. 


THE  CLEMENTI  SCHOOL 


393 


Joseph  Wolfl  (d.  1812)  may  be  inserted  here.  In  one  sense  he  represents 
the  Viennese  group,  since  he  was  born  at  Salzburg  in  1772,  was  taught  there 
by  Leopold  Mozart  and  Michael  Haydn,  appearing  as  a violinist  at  7 (1779), 
and  in  1790  and  1795-8  was  at  Vienna.  But  his  developed  style  connects  him 
with  the  other.  Besides  becoming  a pianist  able  to  compete  with  Beethoven 
and  to  win  his  high  regard,  from  1795  he  took  up  light  opera  and  chamber 
music.  In  1798  he  began  a grand  tour  to  Prague,  Leipsic,  Hamburg,  Berlin 
and  Paris,  where  he  lived  1801-5,  producing  two  operas  and  making  a sensa- 
tion as  a player.  From  1805  he  was  in  London,  recognized  as  a keyboard 
artist  of  the  first  rank.  His  works  varied  greatly  in  quality.  He  was 
thoroughly  equipped  technically  and  had  power  as  contrapuntist  and  impro- 
visator. With  his  enormous  hands  he  could  strike  an  octave  and  a sixth,  so 
that  he  could  execute  passages  for  others  impossible.  He  wrote  7 concertos, 
nearly  40  sonatas,  many  preludes  and  shorter  pieces,  some  trivial,  about  50 
Etudes,  2 symphonies  and  a great  quantity  of  chamber  music.  Among  his 
concertos,  the  Militaire  and  The  Calm  (1806),  and  among  his  sonatas  the 
Non  plus  ultra  and  Le  diable  a quatre  were  specially  successful.  To  the 
Non  plus  ultra  Dussek’s  Le  retour  a Paris  was  set  forth  by  the  publishers  as 
an  answer,  Plus  ultra.  His  5 or  more  operas  included  Der  Hollenberg 
( 1 795  ) , ®er  Kopf  ohne  Mann  (1798)  and  V amour  romanesque  (1804). 

Prince  Louis  Ferdinand  (d.  1806),  born  in  1772,  the  most  gifted  of  the 
Prussian  royal  family,  pursued  music  assiduously  along  with  his  military  life. 
His  playing  aroused  Beethoven’s  enthusiasm.  Late  in  his  short  life  he  was 
intimate  with  Dussek  and  the  young  Spohr.  His  few  works  were  mostly  for 
chamber  combinations  — the  quartet  for  piano  and  strings,  op.  6,  being 
considered  the  best.  His  promising  career  was  cut  off  at  the  battle  against 
Napoleon  at  Saalfeld. 

Less  significant  names  are  Johann  Wilhelm  Hassler  (d.  1822),  born  at 
Erfurt  and  trained  there  by  his  uncle,  Kittel,  in  the  Bach  traditions,  who  was 
a fine  organist  and  wonderfully  facile  at  the  clavier,  active  at  Erfurt  from 
1780,  in  1790  appeared  at  London,  and  from  1792  settled  in  Russia,  first  at 
St.  Petersburg  in  court  service,  later  at  Moscow  as  a teacher,  with  a number 
of  works  (from  1776),  largely  for  the  harpsichord;  Friedrich  Heinrich 
Himmel  (d.  1814),  a protdgd  of  King  Friedrich  Wilhelm  and  a pupil  of 
Naumann,  who  wrote  operas  for  different  places  (from  1792),  toured  as  a 
popular  pianist,  and  left  a large  amount  of  excellent  music,  including  much 
for  the  church  and  many  songs;  and  Franz  Lauska  (d.  1825),  a pupil  of 
Albrechtsberger,  who  was  first  engaged  at  Munich,  then  at  Copenhagen  and 
from  1798  at  Berlin,  being  recognized  as  a fine  virtuoso  and  teacher,  with 
about  15  polished  sonatas  (from  1795)  and  other  works. 

Associated  with  Paris  more  or  less  closely  were  the  following : — 

Nikolaus  Joseph  Hiillmandel  (d.  1823),  born  at  Strassburg  and  a pupil  of 
Emanuel  Bach  at  Hamburg,  in  1771  appeared  as  a player  at  London  and, 
after  a sojourn  in  Italy,  in  1776  settled  at  Paris  as  a teacher,  returning  to 
London  in  1790.  He  knew  how  to  make  piano  music  popular  in  high  society, 
and  wrote  a number  of  sonatas  (from  1780). 

Louis  Adam  (d.  1848),  an  Alsatian,  in  1775  came  to  Paris  as  a teacher  and 
composer,  and  in  1797  became  professor  in  the  Conservatoire,  remaining 


394 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


active  for  45  years.  His  taste  and  ability  kept  him  fully  abreast  of  his  age. 
He  wrote  several  sonatas  and  a method  (1802),  and  taught  many  players  of 
high  rank,  like  Kalkbrenner  and  H droid.  For  a time  he  was  much  interested 
in  the  harmonica  as  an  instrument. 

Daniel  Steibelt  (d.  1823),  born  in  1765  at  Berlin,  a precocious  pupil  of 
Kirnberger,  about  1780  began  extended  wanderings  as  a virtuoso  and  opera- 
writer  which  lasted  about  30  years.  He  was  several  times  in  Paris,  where 
his  opera  Romto  et  Juliette  (1793)  was  successful,  lived  for  a time  at  London 
in  much  popularity,  competed  disastrously  with  Beethoven  at  Vienna,  and  in 
1811  became  director  of  the  opera  at  St.  Petersburg.  His  ways  were  un- 
bearably vain  and  rough,  and  he  is  often  called  a charlatan.  Yet  he  had 
remarkable  technique,  though  lacking  in  fine  expressiveness,  and  was  not 
altogether  unworthy  as  a composer,  though  in  later  years  indulging  in  cheap 
show-pieces.  His  works  were  numerous,  in  all  the  usual  forms,  including 
several  operas  and  operettas. 


163.  Catholic  Church  Music.  — The  cultivation  of  music  in  its 
ecclesiastical  applications  necessarily  goes  on  in  every  period. 
So  in  the  later  18th  century  it  proceeded  steadily  in  all  the 
principal  countries  side  by  side  with  the  new  styles  of  the 
period,  but  usually  far  in  the  background  of  general  interest. 
To  it  many  leading  composers  contributed,  often  industriously 
and  ably,  but  the  conditions  of  popular  thought  were  not 
favorable  to  any  great  enthusiasm  over  it  or  even  to  eminent 
success  in  it.  The  distinctive  qualities  of  sacred  writing  were 
widely  obscured  by  the  impulse  to  treat  it  after  the  fashion  of 
the  opera  or  the  concert-hall.  Against  this  general  drift  there 
were  some  conservatives  who  set  themselves  to  preserve  purity 
and  dignity.  But  these  were  not  numerous  enough  to  give 
character  to  the  time. 

In  the  Catholic  Church  the  cleavage  became  wide  between 
the  small  circle  of  enthusiasts  who  sought  either  to  keep  alive 
a cappella  traditions  or  at  least  to  employ  solid  contrapuntal 
methods  with  instrumental  support  and  with  the  admixture  of 
pure  harmonic  material,  and  the  many  opera-writers  whose  idea 
of  church  music  was  simply  to  import  into  it  all  the  sensuous 
and  florid  ways  of  the  stage.  Italy  naturally  presented  this 
cleavage  most  conspicuously,  but  Austria  and  France  illustrated 
it  as  well.  From  this  time  proceeded  tendencies  that  have 
persisted  ever  since,  those  against  which  the  authorities  of  the 
church  have  recently  put  forth  protest. 


CATHOLIC  CHURCH  MUSIC 


395 


In  Italy  there  were  a few  special  students  of  Palestrina  who  were  worthy 
perpetuators  of  his  style.  Pasquale  Pisari  (d.  1778),  from  1752  a bass  singer 
in  the  Papal  Chapel,  was  a fertile  writer  of  noble  masses  and  motets,  some 
for  8-16  voices,  including  a cycle  of  motets  for  the  whole  year,  written  for 
Lisbon.  His  friend,  Giuseppe  Jannaconi  (d.  1816),  16  years  younger,  ulti- 
mately succeeded  Zingarelli  as  choirmaster  at  St.  Peter’s  (1811).  He  made  a 
superb  collection  of  Palestrina’s  works  (transmitted  to  his  pupil  Baini),  and 
left  a prodigious  amount  of  fine  a cappella  works,  including  over  30  masses 
and  many  motets,  some  polychoric,  with  extraordinary  canons,  etc.  Other 
Roman  composers  were  Giovanni  Battista  Casali  (d.  1792),  from  1759  choir- 
master at  St.John  Lateran;  and  Zingarelli  (d.  1837),  the  popular  opera- 
writer  (see  sec.  1 5 1 ),  from  1792  choirmaster  at  Milan,  from  1802  at  Loreto, 
from  1804  at  St.  Peter’s  and  from  1813  at  Naples,  who,  though  not  a con- 
sistent cultivator  of  the  pure  style,  wrote  prolifically  for  the  church,  including 
a cycle  of  masses  for  every  day  in  the  year,  in  some  of  which  he  showed  his 
versatility  by  adopting  the  old  a cappella  methods. 

To  the  many  opera-writers  already  named  (sec.  15 1),  such  as  Traetta, 
Guglielmi,  Tritto,  Paisiello  and  others,  the  following  may  be  added : — 

Ferdinando  Giuseppe  Bertoni  (d.  1813)  was  from  1752  first  organist  at 
St.  Mark’s,  Venice,  and  after  a few  years  elsewhere  (1778-84)  returned  there 
as  choirmaster,  succeeding  Galuppi.  He  wrote  many  motets  (from  1743), 
several  oratorios,  as  David  poenitens  (1775)  and  II  Giuseppe  riconosciuto 
(1787),  a Te  Deum  (1803),  besides  over  40  operas  (from  1745).  Bernardino 
Ottani  (d.  1827),  pupil  of  Martini  at  Bologna,  from  1757  choirmaster  there 
and  from  1779  at  Turin,  mingled  the  composition  of  his  12  operas  (from 
1767)  with  that  of  almost  50  masses  and  other  sacred  music.  Stanislao 
Mattei  (d.  1825),  another  pupil  of  Martini  at  Bologna  and  in  1770  his  suc- 
cessor at  S.  Francesco,  besides  becoming  a favorite  teacher,  produced  a great 
quantity  of  church  music  of  every  kind,  one  oratorio  and  a work  on  theory 
(1788  and  later  editions).  Bernardo  Bittoni  (d.  1829),  from  1773  choir- 
master at  Rieti  and  from  1781  at  Fabriano,  was  a remarkable  violinist  and 
organist,  writing  many  motets  and  organ-pieces,  with  a few  masses.  Giuseppe 
Sarti  (d.  1802),  still  another  of  Martini’s  pupils,  returned  to  Italy  from 
Denmark  in  1775  and  was  choirmaster  at  Milan  in  1779-84.  He  composed 
masses  and  Misereres,  etc.,  of  real  contrapuntal  excellence.  An  8-part  fugue  is 
noted  as  one  of  the  best  ever  written. 

In  Austria,  chiefly  at  Vienna,  Salzburg  and  Prague,  besides  Haydn  and 
Mozart,  were  the  following,  several  giving  special  attention  to  the  organ : — 

Joseph  Seegr  (d.  1782),  a Bohemian,  pupil  of  Czernohorsky  at  Prague, 
where  from  about  1750  he  was  an  organist  and  teacher  of  wide  renown  — 
even  likened  to  Bach  himself.  Though  he  wrote  much  vocal  sacred  music, 
he  is  now  chiefly  represented  by  organ-preludes,  fugues  and  toccatas.  Franz 
Brixi  (d.  1771),  also  an  organist  and  choirmaster  at  Prague,  though  living 
less  than  40  years,  achieved  a fine  reputation  through  about  75  masses  and 
other  sacred  music,  with  several  oratorios  and  fugues. 

Michael  Haydn  (d.  1806),  from  1762  choirmaster  at  Salzburg,  was  one  of 
the  strongest  and  most  abundant  church  composers  of  the  age,  his  works 


396 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


numbering  almost  400  of  every  description.  His  brother  reckoned  his  church 
style  superior  to  his  own,  and  he  was  repeatedly  sought  as  assistant  choir- 
master by  Prince  Esterhazy.  His  excellence  was  overshadowed  by  his 
brother’s  reputation,  though  his  comparative  obscurity  was  partly  due  to  his 
reticence  and  unobtrusiveness.  Among  his  pupils  was  Max  Keller  (d.  1855), 
organist  at  Altotting  and  a strong  writer  of  masses,  organ-preludes,  etc. 

Maximilian  Stadler  (d.  1833),  a Jesuit  priest  and  abbot,  was  an  expert 
organist  and  composer.  Most  of  his  life  was  spent  at  Vienna  or  near  by. 
He  was  an  admirer  of  Haydn  and  Mozart,  but  not  of  Beethoven.  His 
compositions  were  voluminous,  including  some  masses,  at  least  80  psalms, 
many  motets  and  cantatas,  besides  an  oratorio,  Die  Befreyung  von  Jerusalem, 
and  fugues  for  organ  and  piano. 

Johann  Georg  Albrechtsberger  (d.  1809),  the  distinguished  theorist  and 
teacher  of  Vienna,  where  from  1772  he  was  court-organist  and  from  1792 
choirmaster  at  St.  Stephen’s,  was  another  industrious  church  composer,  his 
works  including  over  25  masses,  at  least  80  motets,  6 oratorios  (as  Die 
Pilgrimme  auf  Golgotha , 1781),  and  many  organ-preludes  and  fugues,  besides 
a great  quantity  of  chamber  and  orchestral  music  (see  sec.  165). 

Franz  Biihler  (d.  1824),  trained  at  Donauworth  as  a Benedictine,  from  1794 
organist  at  Bozen  (Tyrol)  and  from  1801  choirmaster  at  Augsburg,  was  an- 
other fertile  writer  of  masses,  hymns,  etc.,  some  of  which  are  still  used. 

Antonio  Salieri  (d.  1825),  the  powerful  opera-writer,  from  1788  court-choir- 
master  at  Vienna,  wrote  many  oratorios,  including  a Passion  (1778),  some 
masses  and  other  church  works  (mostly  after  1790)  ; and  Joseph  Preindl 
(d.  1823),  pupil  of  Albrechtsberger,  from  1780  choirmaster  at  St.  Peter’s, 
Vienna,  and  from  1809  at  St.  Stephen’s,  produced  many  masses,  a Te  Deum, 
fine  Lamentations,  etc. 

In  Germany  should  be  added  a few  names  : — 

Johann  Georg  Schiirer  (d.  1786),  from  1748  court-composer  for  sacred  music 
at  Dresden,  left  some  40  masses,  3 Requiems,  140  psalms,  many  motets  and  2 
oratorios,  besides  4 Italian  operas  and  a singspiel  — in  all  over  600  works. 
Associated  with  him  at  Dresden  were  J.  G.  Naumann  (d.  1801)  and  Schuster 
(d.  1812),  already  noted  (secs.  151,  153);  and  also  Franz  Seydelmann 
(d.  1806),  from  1772  court-composer  and  from  1787  choirmaster,  whose 
remains  include  about  35  masses,  as  many  psalms,  much  other  sacred  music, 
3 oratorios  (from  1774),  several  operas  (as  the  singspiel  Arsene , 1779,  and 
II  capriccio  corretto , 1783),  songs  and  piano-sonatas. 

Georg  Joseph  Vogler  (d.  1814)  was  a unique  genius.  Born  in  1749  at 
Wurzburg,  he  was  educated  both  in  theology  and  in  music  at  the  Jesuit 
college  there,  becoming  an  accomplished  organist.  In  1770  he  entered  the 
service  of  the  Elector  Palatine  at  Mannheim,  and  in  1774  was  sent  to  Bologna 
to  study  with  Martini,  but,  disliking  the  latter’s  emphasis  on  counterpoint, 
betook  himself  to  Padua  both  to  continue  theology  and  to  study  with 
Vallotti.  He  also  traveled  through  Italy  as  a virtuoso,  receiving  many  honors. 
Late  in  1775  he  returned  to  Mannheim,  became  assistant  choirmaster  and 
started  a music-school.  In  1778  he  removed  with  the  court  to  Munich,  con- 
tinuing in  honor  with  his  patron,  though  unpopular  with  the  musicians. 
From  1780  he  visited  Paris  and  London,  where  his  theoretical  ideas  and  his 


PROTESTANT  CHURCH  MUSIC 


397 


technical  facility  attracted  attention.  In  1784  he  was  recalled  to  Munich  and 
made  choirmaster,  but  in  1785  set  out  again  for  a tour  in  northwestern  Ger- 
many, becoming  in  1786  court-choirmaster  at  Stockholm  and  establishing  a 
school.  Having  devised  many  improvements  in  organ-building  (‘simplifica- 
tions1) and  a portable  ‘orchestrion1  embodying  some  of  them,  in  1788  he 
went  to  Prussia,  in  1790  to  England  and  then  to  various  Continental  countries, 
playing,  arguing  and  seeking  orders  for  his  specialties.  From  1807  he  was 
court-choirmaster  at  Darmstadt,  where  he  founded  still  another  school.  He 
was  a singular  mixture  of  ability  and  charlatanry.  His  ideas  about  theory  and 
instrument-making  were  original  and  ahead  of  his  time.  His  arrogance  and 
oddity  turned  most  musicians  against  him,  but  he  was  adept  in  cajoling  the 
favor  of  princes  and  astonishing  the  public.  He  had  the  title  of  Abbe  and 
affected  extreme  piety.  He  attracted  numerous  pupils,  who  were  generally 
attached  to  him,  and  several  of  them  became  famous  (as  Weber  and  Meyer- 
beer). His  listed  works  number  over  300,  of  which  the  best  are  choral  and 
organ-pieces  of  every  description,  including  many  masses,  Te  Deums,  Misereres, 
hymns,  etc.,  with  over  10  operas  (from  1780)  in  various  styles.  As  a critic 
and  theorist  he  was  fertile  and  enterprising,  and  his  pedagogical  influence 
was  considerable  (see  sec.  165). 

Peter  von  Winter  (d.  1825),  the  opera-writer  (see  sec.  153),  was  a pupil  of 
Vogler  and,  like  him,  a protege  of  the  Elector  at  Mannheim  and  Munich, 
where  he  was  ultimately  choirmaster.  He  wrote  over  25  masses,  a few  orato- 
rios, many  sacred  cantatas  and  smaller  sacred  works,  some  of  them  for  the 
Protestant  service.  Though  not  a strong  contrapuntist  or  apt  at  emotional 
expression,  he  was  clever  in  choral  and  instrumental  ensembles. 

In  France  the  most  striking  sacred  composers  were  Le  Sueur  and  Cheru- 
bini, representing  the  free  and  the  strict  styles  respectively ; but  their  work 
in  this  field  belongs  chiefly  to  the  next  period.  Among  the  famous  organists 
was  Nicolas  Sejan  (d.  1819),  working  in  various  Paris  churches  from  1760  for 
more  than  50  years. 

In  Spain  should  be  named  Francisco  Saverio  Garcia  (d.  1809),  from  1756 
choirmaster  at  Saragossa,  and  Pedro  Albeniz  (d.  1821),  choirmaster  at  San 
Sebastiano. 

164.  Protestant  Church  Music.  — Neither  the  Lutheran  nor 
the  Anglican  Church  offers  anything  of  decided  musical  in- 
terest at  this  period.  In  Germany,  to  be  sure,  as  in  Austria, 
attention  to  thoughtful  organ  music  continued  to  some  extent, 
and  the  average  cantor  was  expected  to  be  something  of  a con- 
trapuntist. But  the  incentives  to  originality  and  genius  were 
extremely  small.  In  England  interest  in  the  noble  organ  style 
hardly  existed,  as  is  evidenced  by  the  lack  of  well-equipped  in- 
struments, and  only  in  the  cathedrals  was  choir  music  carefully 
considered.  In  both  cases  the  prevalent  secular  styles  influenced 
those  of  the  church,  awakening  a desire  for  something  less 


398 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


strenuous  than  strict  polyphony.  Yet  the  reaction  toward 
operatic  styles  was  not  as  great  as  in  Catholic  countries,  since 
in  both  Germany  and  England  the  Italian  opera  was  exotic. 
Hence,  especially  in  England,  there  begins  to  appear  a mod- 
ern church  style  which  avoids  technical  elaboration  and  is  yet 
not  without  dignity  and  solemnity  — a compromise  that  has 
often  proved  valuable  as  a means  of  religious  expression  and 
impression.  The  popular  influence  of  the  more  sterling  English 
services  and  anthems,  for  instance,  has  had  more  historical  im- 
portance than  their  technical  quality  would  seem  to  warrant, 
simply  because  for  many  communities  they  were  almost  the  only 
forms  of  artistic  music  known.  The  parallel  development  of  the 
simple  motet  in  Germany  was  delayed  till  the  next  period,  when 
it  was  stimulated  by  the  liturgical  awakening  in  the  Lutheran 
churches  under  the  lead  of  Schleiermacher. 

In  Germany  a few  names  may  be  selected : — 

Karl  Friedrich  Christian  Fasch  (d.  1800),  from  1756  associated  with  Eman- 
uel Bach  in  the  royal  band  at  Berlin  and  1774-6  in  charge  of  the  opera- 
orchestra,  was  a good  contrapuntist.  In  1790  he  began  a choral  society  which 
became  the  famous  Singakademie.  Before  his  death  he  destroyed  many 
works  as  unworthy,  but  some  survive  — psalms,  motets,  a mass  for  16  voices, 
etc.,  besides  many  clavier-pieces. 

Johann  Christian  Kittel  (d.  1809),  the  last  pupil  of  J.  S.  Bach,  from  1756 
organist  at  Erfurt,  won  wide  renown  by  his  masterly  playing  in  the  old  style 
and  attracted  many  scholars.  In  1800-1,  however,  though  almost  70  years  old, 
he  was  forced  to  undertake  public  concerts  at  Hamburg  and  Altona,  which  were 
artistically  unsuccessful.  His  works  were  chiefly  for  the  organ,  including  pre- 
ludes, chorale-elaborations,  fugettas  and  a collection  (1801-8). 

Contemporary  with  these  was  Johann  Christoph  Friedrich  Bach  (d.  1795), 
J.  S.  Bach’s  fourth  surviving  son,  who,  after  studying  law,  chose  music  for  his 
career  and  from  1756  was  chamber  musician  at  Biickeburg.  He  excelled  as  a 
harpsichordist,  but  also  wrote  many  sacred  cantatas,  an  oratorio  (1773),  some 
motets, an  opera , Die  Amerikanerin  (1776)  and  much  chamber  and  clavier 
music.  His  ability  was  only  moderate.  Christian  Gotthilf  Tag  (d.  1811), 
from  1755  for  53  years  cantor  at  Hohenstein  (Saxony),  is  cited  as  a typical 
German  church  musician  of  the  time,  plodding,  methodical  and  prolific. 
Georg  Michael  Telemann  (d.  1831),  from  about  1773  cantor  at  Riga,  was 
another.  More  conspicuous  was  Johann  Gottfried  Schicht  (d.  1823),  who  as 
a law-student  at  Leipsic  came  under  Hiller’s  influence,  played  the  violin  and 
the  piano  at  the  Gewandhaus,  and  in  1785  succeeded  Hiller  as  conductor  there, 
from  1798  was  organist  at  the  New  Church  and  from  1810  cantor  at  the 
Thomasschule.  He  wrote  3 oratorios  (from  1785),  several  masses,  many 
motets,  and  edited  a noted  Choralbuch  (1819).  Justin  Heinrich  Knecht 
(d.  1817),  from  1771  director  and  later  organist  at  Biberach  and  in  1807-9 


PROTESTANT  CHURCH  MUSIC 


399 


choirmaster  at  Stuttgart,  was  a popular  teacher  and  good  theorist.  He  was 
also  a fluent  writer  of  vocal  and  organ-pieces,  besides  clavier  music  and  a 
rather  striking  1 Nature  1 symphony.  He  edited  a Choralbuch  (1799-1816),  an 
Orgelschule  (1795-98),  and  many  theoretical  books.  Johann  Gottfried  Vier- 
ling  (d.  1813),  from  about  1780  organist  at  Schmalkalden,  was  an  accomplished 
player  and  contrapuntist,  publishing  sacred  cantatas  and  organ-pieces,  a Choral- 
buch (1789)  and  a work  on  preluding  (1794). 

Examples  of  the  more  popular  style  were  Johann  Friedrich  Doles  (d.  1797), 
a pupil  of  J.  S.  Bach,  but  far  from  adopting  his  methods,  who  from  1744  was 
cantor  at  Freiberg  (Saxony)  and  from  1756  in  the  Thomasschule  at  Leipsic ; 
Christian  Ehregott  Weinlig  (d.  1813),  from  1767  organist  at  Leipsic  and  from 
1780  at  Dresden,  where  in  1785  he  succeeded  his  teacher  Homilius  as  cantor 
of  the  Kreuzschule;  Cornelius  von  Konigslow  (d.  1833),  fr°m  1773  organist  at 
Liibeck,  writing  oratorios  (from  1781)  and  imitating  his  predecessor  Buxte- 
hude’s Abendmusiken . 

In  England  active  workers  included  Richard  Langdon  (d.  1803),  from  1753 
organist  at  Exeter,  from  1778  at  Bristol  and  from  1782  at  Armagh  ; William 
Jackson  (d.  1803),  from  1755  a teacher  at  Exeter  and  popular  for  his  songs  and 
glees,  and  from  1777  organist  at  the  cathedral;  Edmund  Ayrton  (d.  1808), 
from  1754  organist  at  Southwell,  from  1764  in  the  Chapel  Royal  and  from  1780 
its  choirmaster,  succeeding  Nares,  with  4 services  and  10  anthems ; Samuel 
Arnold  (d.  1802),  pupil  of  Gates  and  Nares,  in  1783  Nares’  successor  at  the 
Chapel  Royal,  and  in  1793  Cooke’s  at  Westminster,  the  writer  of  several  ora- 
torios (from  1767),  including  The  Prodigal  Son  (1 777),  and  over  20  anthems, 
and  the  editor  of  a not  entirely  successful  edition  of  Handel’s  works  (about  40 
vols.,  from  1786)  and  of  a standard  collection  of  Cathedral  Music  (4  vols., 
1 79°)  ; John  [Christmas]  Beckwith  (d.  1809),  pupil  of  P.  Hayes,  from  1780 
organist  at  Norwich,  writer  of  about  15  anthems,  some  organ-preludes  (1780), 
glees  and  songs,  besides  a collection  of  chants  (1808),  containing  a brief  his- 
tory of  chanting;  William  Russell  (d.  1813),  pupil  of  Arnold,  from  1789 
organist  at  various  London  churches  and  from  1801  pianist  at  Co  vent  Garden, 
with  2 oratorios,  2 services,  a few  anthems  and  preludes,  with  several  odes ; 
and  John  Page  (d.  1812),  a tenor  singer  at  Windsor  and  London,  who  made 
good  collections  of  anthems  (1800),  glees  (1804),  etc. 

Several  of  the  stronger  writers  of  the  next  period  began  active  work  before 
1800,  such  as  Attwood,  Clarke-Whitfeld,  Wesley  and  Crotch  (see  sec.  186). 

It  is  in  this  period  that  the  earliest  stirrings  of  independent 
musical  composition  appeared  in  America,  though  their  fruits, 
mostly  hymn-tunes  and  anthems,  were  of  the  slenderest  abso- 
lute value. 

The  pioneers,  as  has  lately  been  shown,  were  Francis  Hopkinson  (d.  1791) 
and  James  Lyon,  both  composing  as  early  as  1759.  From  1770  many  collec- 
tions of  sacred  music  containing  more  or  less  original  matter  appeared  in  New 
England,  as  by  William  Billings  (d.  1800),  Andrew  Law  (d.  1821),  Daniel 
Read  (d.  1836),  and  others. 


CHAPTER  XXIII 


THEORETICAL  AND  LITERARY  PROGRESS  ' 

165.  Literature  about  Music.  — Nothing  better  marks  the  ad- 
vance in  musical  intellectuality  than  the  gain  in  the  amount  and 
quality  of  the  writing  about  musical  questions.  In  this  respect 
the  great  productiveness  of  the  19th  century  was  now  clearly 
foreshadowed.  The  changes  that  were  going  on  in  practical 
methods  began  to  be  accompanied  in  the  field  of  theory  by  at- 
tempts to  rationalize  the  facts  and  to  rearrange  the  principles 
of  composition  from  the  harmonic  rather  than  the  contrapuntal 
centre  ; but  on  the  whole,  owing  to  the  influence  of  certain  lead- 
ing minds,  theory  remained  more  conservative  than  practical 
composition.  Criticism,  however,  was  freer  and  more  progressive. 
It  now  began  to  be  less  intensely  personal  and  subjective  in 
character  than  earlier  in  the  century,  and  in  many  quarters 
reached  out  after  some  sort  of  objective  aesthetic  system, 
though  it  must  be  said  that  the  usual  type  of  aesthetics 
was  strongly  a priori  rather  than  inductive.  In  the  field  of 
pedagogics,  the  most  notable  feature  was  the  beginning  of  a 
systematic  treatment  of  keyboard  technique,  stimulated  by  the 
rapid  advance  of  the  piano  and  its  public  use.  It  was  not  yet 
perceived  how  great  an  influence  this  was  to  have  upon  the 
detail  of  all  composition. 

More  important  than  these  movements  was  the  awakening  of 
a true  sense  of  historical  investigation  and  presentation,  shown 
both  in  the  publication  of  histories  proper  and  in  the  accumula- 
tion of  historic  materials  by  patient  research.  While  the  his- 
torical works  actually  produced  are  now  as  a rule  superseded 
by  later  ones,  the  impetus  and  example  of  students  like  Martini, 
Hawkins,  Burney,  Gerbert  and  Forkel  are  still  matters  of  ad- 
miration. 

The  increasing  thoughtfulness  of  the  musical  public  is  evi- 
denced by  the  quantity  and  variety  of  books,  periodicals  and 
pamphlets,  of  which  repeated  editions  were  often  demanded. 

400 


MUSICAL  LITERATURE 


401 


Acoustical  questions  continued  to  command  attention,  especially  from 
those  in  search  of  harmonic  foundations.  As  examples  we  may  cite  works 
by  Kirnberger  of  Berlin  (d.  1783)  on  temperament  (1760);  by  Johann 
Heinrich  Lambert  (d.  1777),  a Prussian  civil  official,  on  implements  of  re- 
search, flute-tones,  etc.  (1763-75);  by  Berlin  of  Drontheim  (d.  c.  1775)  on 
tonometry  by  logarithms  (1767)  ; by  Giordano  Riccatti  (d.  1790),  an  Italian 
nobleman  of  Treviso  (works  from  1767)  ; by  Marpurg  of  Berlin  (d.  1795)  on 
temperament  (1779);  by  Vallotti  (d.  1780),  the  Paduan  organist  (1779)  ; 
and  by  the  Englishman  Matthew  Young  (d.  1800),  a general  treatise  (1784). 
To  these  may  be  added  writings  (1800-07)  by  Vogler  (d.  1814)  and  Tiirk  of 
Halle  (d.  1813). 

Ernst  Chladni  (d.  1827)  led  the  age  in  musical  physics,  surpassing  Sauveur 
in  the  reach  and  exactitude  of  his  investigations.  Born  in  1756  and  extraor- 
dinarily educated  in  geography,  medicine,  law  and  physics,  from  1787  he 
devoted  himself  wholly  to  the  phenomena  of  sound.  He  traveled  widely  as  a 
lecturer  and  was  highly  honored,  as  by  Napoleon  in  1808.  His  best  demon- 
strations were  regarding  4 partial-tones  ’ and  the  vibrations  of  rods  and  plates. 
Besides  his  classic  treatise,  Die  Akustik  (1802),  he  published  many  lesser 
works.  He  wasted  energy  in  perfecting  the  1 euphon 1 and  4 clavicylinder,’ 
instruments  whose  tones  were  produced  by  friction  upon  glass  rods  or  tubes. 

The  number  of  works  on  composition  was  considerable,  ranging  from 
elaborate  treatises  to  popular  handbooks.  The  ablest  were  by  Italians  or 
Germans.  Many  of  them  were  marred  by  needless  polemics. 

Giambattista  Martini  (d.  1784)  of  Bologna,  besides  being  a strong 
composer,  was  the  most  learned  theorist  of  the  old  school  and  a teacher 
sought  after  from  all  quarters.  His  published  works  did  not  begin  till  1757, 
when  he  was  over  50.  After  two  smaller  works  (1757,  ’69),  came  his  famous 
treatise  (2  vols.,  1774-6),  valuable  both  for  copious  examples  from  early 
masters,  mostly  of  the  Roman  school,  and  for  profound  annotations  and 
discussions.  The  standpoint,  as  in  the  case  of  Fux,  was  that  of  advanced 
mediaeval  theory,  but  held  without  severity.  For  years  Martini  also  labored 
upon  a History*  (3  vols.,  1757-81,  4th  unfinished),  but  did  not  get  beyond 
ancient  times.  He  left  much  material  in  MS.,  including  polemical  essays 
against  Eximeno,  Riccieri  and  others,  a dictionary  of  terms,  some  acoustical 
discussions,  and  valuable  catalogues  of  musicians  and  books,  made  up  out  of 
his  extraordinary  library  (17,000  vols.) . He  was  full  of  kindness  for  musicians, 
young  and  old,  as  shown  in  his  welcome  (1770)  to  the  boy  Mozart,  and  his 
acquaintance  was  almost  as  wide  as  his  fame.  Giuseppe  Paolucci  (d.  1 777), 
choirmaster  at  Venice,  Sinigaglia  and  Assisi,  Martini’s  pupil,  anticipated  his 
method  by  a notable  treatise  (1765-72).  Giambattista  Mancini  (d.  1800), 
another  pupil,  long  a teacher  at  the  court  of  Vienna,  followed  (1774). 

Francesco  Antonio  Vallotti  (d.  1780),  the  great  organist  of  Padua,  issued 
a striking  treatise  (1779,  unfinished)  that  helped  to  show  that  the  old  con- 
trapuntal theories  and  the  new  harmony  were  not  essentially  antagonistic. 
His  style  was  clear  and  his  reasoning  generally  cogent.  Luigi  Antonio 
Sabbatini  (d.  1809),  pupil  of  Martini  and  Vallotti,  from  1766  choirmaster  at 
Rome  and  from  1786  at  Padua,  followed  with  several  important  works  (1789- 
1802). 

2D 


402 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


Antonio  Eximeno  (d.  1808),  born  in  Spain,  after  training  as  a Jesuit,  worked 
at  Rome.  He  strongly  advocated  (1774)  the  relaxation  of  the  strictness  of 
the  old  school,  and  was  criticized  by  conservatives  like  Martini. 

Nicola  Sala  (d.  c.  1800),  the  veteran  teacher  and  composer  of  Naples, 
when  over  90  years  old,  put  forth  a treatise  (1794)  which,  however,  has  been 
severely  attacked  (F^tis). 

Johann  Georg  Albrechtsberger  (d.  1809)  from  1772  became  the  chief 
theoretical  master  in  the  Viennese  circle,  his  greatest  pupil  being  Beethoven. 
He  put  forth  a monumental  treatise  (1790),  often  translated,  besides  other 
works  (complete  edition  by  Seyfried,  1826). 

Johann  Philipp  Kirnberger  (d.  1783),  a pupil  of  J.  S.  Bach  and  the  ad- 
mirer of  his  sons  Friedemann  and  Emanuel,  from  1758  worked  at  Berlin, 
disputing  with  Marpurg  and  others  the  leadership  of  German  thought.  He 
was  an  able  theorist,  though  not  always  judicious  or  temperate  (chief  work, 
1 77 1 -9,  others,  1773-82). 

Christoph  Gottlieb  Schroter  of  Nordhausen  (d.  1782)  was  the  author  of  a 
work  on  harmony  (1772).  Georg  Joseph  Vogler  (d.  1814)  was  as  independent 
in  theory  as  elsewhere  (see  sec.  163).  In  general,  he  followed  his  teacher 
Vallotti,  though  with  views  of  his  own,  often  in  advance  of  his  day  (works, 
1776-1802,  and  posthumously  on  the  fugue).  Heinrich  Christoph  Koch  (d. 

1816) ,  a little-known  musician  at  Rudolstadt,  wrote  ably  from  the  new 
melodic  and  harmonic  standpoint  (1782-93,  besides  a brochure  on  enharmonic 
modulation,  1812). 

Pierre  Joseph  Roussier  (d.  1790),  a follower  of  Rameau,  wrote  many  works 
(from  1755),  including  studies  upon  ancient  mathematical  speculations.  Jean 
Baptiste  Mercadier  (d.  1815)  attempted  (17^6)  to  replace  both  Rameau  and 
Tartini  by  theories  of  his  own. 

Among  the  many  handbooks  of  less  significance  were  those  of  Johann 
Lorenz  Albrecht  (d.  1773),  organist  at  Miihlhausen  (1761)  ; of  Johann 
Samuel  Petri  (d.  1808),  a Silesian  cantor  (1767,  ’82);  of  Ernst  Wilhelm 
Wolf  (d.  1792),  court-choirmaster  at  Weimar  (1788);  of  J.  H.  Knecht  (d. 

1817) ,  a useful  teacher  at  Biberach  (works,  1785-1803);  of  the  bombastic 

Johann  Gottlieb  Portmann  (d.  1798),  from  1766  at  Darmstadt  (1785-98); 
of  Daniel  Gottlob  Tiirk  (d.  1813),  the  well-known  teacher  at  Halle  (1791- 
1800);  of  Honore  Francois  Marie  Langl6  (d.  1807),  trained  at  Naples,  but 
from  1764  at  Paris  and  after  1791  in  the  Conservatoire  (1793-1805);  of 
August  Friedrich  Karl  Kollmann  (d.  1829),  a teacher  and  organist  in  London 
( 1 796— 1 806)  ; of  Carlo  Gervasoni  (d.  1819),  choirmaster  at  Borgo  Taro 

(1800-12);  and  of  Callcott  (d.  1821),  the  English  glee-writer  (1806). 

To  these  may  be  added  special  studies  on  questions  of  metrics  by  Giovenale 
Sacchi  (d.  1789),  a Barnabite  monk  at  Milan  (1770-8)  ; and  the  remarkable 
didactic  poem,  La  musica  (1779),  by  the  Spaniard  Tomas  de  Yriarte  (d.  c. 
1791),  which  treats  of  a variety  of  theoretical  and  critical  points. 

Connected  with  the  theorists  were  the  critics,  though  many  of  them  ap- 
proached music  purely  from  the  literary  or  the  speculative  side. 

In  the  Gluck  controversy  at  Paris  the  protagonists  against  him  were  Jean 
Francois  Marmontel  (d.  1799),  Jean  Francis  de  Laharpe  (d.  1803),  Claude 


MUSICAL  LITERATURE 


403 


Philibert  CoquSau  (d.  1794)  and  Pierre  Louis  Ginguene  (d.  1816),  and,  in  his 
favor,  Francois  Arnaud  (d.  1784),  Jean  Baptiste  Antoine  Suard  (d.  1817)  and 
Gaspar  Michel  Leblond  (d.  1809)  — the  dates  of  their  writing  being  1777-83. 
Other  students  of  Gluck’s  music  were  Friedrich  Just  Riedel  (d.  1785),  and  Karl 
Spazier  (d.  1805),  the  one  in  1775,  the  other  in  1795. 

Among  general  critiques  rather  notable  are  those  of  Reichardt  (d.  1814), 
the  great  song-writer,  especially  his  Brief e (from  1774)  ; and  the  autobiogra- 
phy of  Karl  Spazier  (d.  1805),  professor  at  Giessen  (1792-6),  who  also  wrote 
on  church  music.  Some  of  Reichardt’s  observations  were  attacked  (1789)  by 
Johann  Karl  Friedrich  Rellstab  (d.  1813),  a Berlin  publisher. 

Musical  aesthetics  now  begins  to  take  shape  as  a branch  of  a general  theory 
of  the  fine  arts.  A prominent  writer  was  Johann  Georg  Sulzer  (d.  1779),  Pro" 
fessor  at  Berlin  (works  from  1757),  in  whose  encyclopaedic  Theorie  der  schonen 
Kiinste  (1772-4,  much  extended  after  1792  by  other  editors)  the  musical 
articles  were  mainly  supplied  by  J.  A.  P.  Schulz  (d.  1800),  at  first  with  the  help 
of  Kirnberger.  Somewhat  similar  works  were  undertaken  by  Johann  August 
Eberhard  (d.  1809),  professor  at  Halle  (1783,  1803-5)  i by  Christian  Friedrich 
Michaelis  (d.  1834),  teacher  at  Leipsic  (1795-1800,  and  later);  and  by  the 
erratic  Daniel  Schubart  (d.  1791)  of  Stuttgart  (1806,  edited  by  his  son).  The 
relations  of  poetry  and  music  were  variously  discussed  by  John  Brown  (d.  1766) 
in  1763;  by  the  Marquis  de  Chastellux  (d.  1788)  in  1765;  and  by  Michel 
Paul  Gui  de  Chabanon  (d.  1792)  in  1779  — all  these  works  being  translated 
more  or  less.  Still  further  writers  were  Karl  Ludwig  Junker  (d.  1797)  on 
music  in  general  (1 777,  ’86)  ; Johann  Jakob  Engel  (d.  1802)  on  dramatic 
depiction  in  music  (1780)  ; and  the  brothers  Von  Dalberg  (d.  1817,  1812)  on 
a variety  of  subjects  (from  1787). 

Treatises  upon  particular  instruments  or  instruction-books  were  frequent, 
those  pertaining  to  the  organ  and  the  piano  being  the  most  conspicuous. 

Thus,  regarding  organ-building,  appeared  in  1766-78  (3  vols.,  and  a 4th 
added  in  German  by  J.  C.  Vollbeding,  1793)  the  notable  treatise  of  Francois 
Bedos  de  Celles  (d.  1779),  a Benedictine  of  St.  Maur;  with  others  in  1779  by 
Johann  Samuel  Halle  (d.  1810),  a teacher  at  Berlin;  in  1801  by  Georg 
Christian  Friedrich  Schlimbach  of  Berlin  (d.  after  1806)  ; in  1804  by  Johann 
Heinrich  Zang  of  Schweinfurt  (d.  1811)  ; and  in  1806  by  Vogler  (d.  1814)  — 
the  latter  proposing  simplifications  and  improvements,  not  all  of  which 
secured  acceptance.  Among  organ  instruction-books  may  be  noted  those  in 
1766-1810  by  Joachim  Hess  (d.  c.  1810),  for  over  50  years  at  Gouda  (Holland)  ; 
in  1795-8  by  Knecht  of  Biberach  (d.  1817),  Vogler’s  special  rival;  and  in 
1 80 1 -8  by  Kittel  of  Erfurt  (d.  1809). 

Regarding  violin-playing  there  were  noted  works  (1756)  by  Leopold 
Mozart  (d.  1787),  and  (1791-6)  by  Francesco  Galeazzi  of  Rome  (d.  c.  1819)  ; 
regarding  flute-plaving  several  (1786-1800)  by  Johann  Georg  Tromlitz  (d.  1805) 
of  Leipsic,  as  well  as  the  autobiography  (1807)  of  Friedrich  Ludwig  Dulon 
(d.  1826),  a widely-known  blind  flutist;  and  regarding  trumpet  and  drum 
music  (1795)  by  Johann  Ernst  Altenburg  of  Weissenfels  and  Bitterfeld 
(d.  1801).  John  Gunn  (d.  c.  1824)  issued  various  instruction-books  for  the 
piano,  ’cello  (1793)  and  flute,  besides  an  important  history  of  Scottish  harpers 
(1807). 


404 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


Regarding  piano-playing  now  begins  the  long  list  of  methods  and  studies 
upon  which  modern  technique  rests.  Back  of  those  meant  for  the  piano  lay 
many  devised  for  the  clavichord  or  harpsichord,  such  as  the  famous  example 
0 753-87)  by  K.  P.  E.  Bach  (d.  1788)  and  that  by  Georg  Simon  Lohlein  (d. 
1781)  of  Leipsic  and  Danzig  (1765-81,  with  many  later  editions,  as  by  J.  G. 
Wetthauer,  1791,  and  A.  E.  Muller,  1804).  All  the  great  virtuosi  of  the 
period  contributed,  though  usually  coming  to  formal  publication  only  after 
years  of  teaching.  Examples  are  those  by  Clementi  (d.  1832),  whose  best 
pedagogical  work  was  his  Gradus  (1817)  ; by  Dussek  (d.  1812)  ; in  1798- 
1804  by  Louis  Adam  (d.  1848)  for  the  Paris  Conservatoire;  and  about  1810 
by  J.  B.  Cramer  (d.  1858),  Wolfl  (d.  1812)  and  Pollini  (d.  1846). 

This  period  witnessed  the  advent  of  the  genuine  historical  investigator, 
whose  conclusions  rest  upon  documents  and  personal  research.  The  earliest 
was  Martini  (d.  1784),  whose  Storia  has  been  mentioned  above.  Contem- 
poraneous with  him  were  two  Englishmen  who  accomplished  much  more. 

John  Hawkins  (d.  1789),  born  in  1719,  was  trained  in  mathematics  and  the 
law,  continuing  to  practise  the  latter  through  his  life.  He  was  interested  in 
literary  studies  and  was  a special  friend  of  Samuel  Johnson.  Musical  matters 
attracted  him  early,  and,  becoming  wealthy  through  marriage,  he  retired  to 
Twickenham,  collected  a superb  library  and  devoted  himself  to  preparing  his 
great  History  (5  vols.,  1776,  republished  1853  and  1 875 ) . He  also  wrote  an 
account  of  the  Academy  of  Ancient  Music  (1770).  His  History  came  into 
immediate  competition  with  the  first  volume  of  Burney,  at  first  unsuccessfully, 
because  not  so  brilliantly  written,  but  later  with  increasing  appreciation  of  its 
accuracy. 

Charles  Burney  (d.  1814),  born  in  1726,  was  brought  up  as  a musician,  for 
a time  being  a pupil  of  Arne.  He  composed  much  dramatic  music  (1745-66), 
with  several  piano-  or  violin-sonatas  and  concertos,  etc.  From  1749  he  was 
organist  in  London  and  from  1751  at  Lynn  Regis,  where  the  project  of  his 
History  was  formed.  Returning  to  London  in  1760,  while  continuing  musical 
production,  he  began  collecting  materials.  In  1770  and  1772  he  made 
extensive  tours  on  the  Continent,  enjoying  opportunities  to  visit  libraries  and 
consult  with  musicians.  He  published  accounts  of  these  tours  (France  and 
Italy,  1771,  Germany,  the  Netherlands,  etc.,  1773).  His  History  (4  vols., 
1776-89)  came  out  slowly,  but  secured  quick  popularity  for  its  readableness 
and  freshness.  He  also  wrote  accounts  of  the  youthful  prodigy  Crotch  (1770) 
and  of  the  Handel  Commemoration  (1785),  besides  a life  of  the  poet  Metastasio 
(3  vols.,  1796).  He  was  an  exceedingly  affable  and  cultivated  man,  and  had 
a prodigious  circle  of  famous  friends. 

Less  important  histories  were  published  in  1788  by  Johann  Nikolaus 
Forkel  (d.  1818),  reaching  only  to  the  middle  of  the  16th  century;  in  1792 
by  Christian  Kalkbrenner  (d.  1806),  who  was  in  court  service  at  Berlin,  later 
chorusmaster  at  the  Paris  Opdra;  and  in  1793  by  Richard  Eastcott  (d.  1828). 
More  or  less  useful  Almanachs  and  other  annals  were  prepared  in  1778  and 
1792-8  by  Christian  Gottfried  Thomas  (d.  1806),  a Leipsic  composer  and 
publisher;  in  1782-4  by  Karl  Ludwig  Junker  (d.  1797),  who  also  put  forth 
(1776)  studies  of  some  20  composers,  including  Emanuel  and  Christian 
Bach,  Boccherini,  Ditters,  Gretry  and  Haydn  (poorly  done);  in  1782-4  and 


MUSICAL  LITERATURE 


405 


1789  by  Forkel;  and,  concerning  the  French  theatre,  with  many  sidelights 
upon  the  opera,  from  1750  by  Joseph  de  Laporte  (d.  1779),  a series  continued 
after  his  death  by  N.  B.  Duchesne  and  others  (48  vols.  to  1815);  and  by 
Louis  Francis  Beffara  (d.  1838),  a police-commissioner  at  Paris  (35  vols.  in 
MS.,  destroyed  by  fire  in  1871). 

Special  studies  were  made  on  ancient  music  in  1770-81  by  Pierre  Joseph 
Roussier  (d.  c.  1790),  and  in  1778  by  Giovenale  Sacchi  (d.  1789)  ; and  on 
mediaeval  music  by  Jean  Benjamin  de  Laborde  (d.  1794),  a pupil  of  Rameau 
and  long  a favorite  at  court  (5  vols.,  1780-1,  with  a life  of  Raoul  de  Coucy, 
1781),  whose  method  was  confused  and  untrustworthy. 

Martin  Gerbert  (d.  1793),  trained  as  a Benedictine  and  from  1764  abbot  at 
St.  Blaise,  had  access  thereto  valuable  MSS.  (burnt  in  1768),  from  which 
(and  from  researches  in  many  other  libraries  in  France,  Germany  and  Italy) 
he  compiled  invaluable  collections  of  mediaeval  writings  about  music  (1774,  ’ 84) 
and  of  German  liturgies  (1776-9),  which  remained  unique  sources  until 
improved  and  supplemented  by  19th-century  investigators. 

Stefano  Arteaga  (d.  1799),  a Spanish  Jesuit  who  worked  at  both  Bologna 
and  Paris,  a close  friend  of  Martini,  prepared  a valuable  work  on  Italian  opera 
(1783),  which  was  translated  into  German  by  Forkel  (1789)  and  into  French 
(1802). 

An  attempt  was  made  in  1783  by  Johann  Sigmund  Gruber  (d.  1805),  a 
Nuremberg  lawyer,  to  draft  a comprehensive  sketch  of  the  literature  about 
music.  In  1792  appeared  the  better  work  of  Johann  Nikolaus  Forkel  (d. 
1818),  musical  director  at  Gottingen,  one  of  the  first  diligent  students  of 
historical  sources,  whose  book  was  the  basis  of  the  later  works  of  Lichtenthal 
and  Becker. 

Edward  Jones  (d.  1824)  made  remarkable  collections  of  old  Welsh 
music  (1784-1802),  of  Greek  and  Oriental  airs  (1804)  and  other  national 
music.  George  Thomson  (d.  1851)  was  indefatigable  in  gathering  Scotch, 
Irish  and  Welsh  melodies  (17  vols.,  1793-1841),  provided  with  modern 
accompaniments.  Irish  music  was  collected  in  1786  by  Joseph  Cooper  Walker 
(d.  1810)  and  from  1796  by  Edward  Bunting  (d.  1843),  the  latter  writing  also 
upon  the  history  of  the  harp. 

Pere  Amiot  (d.  c.  1794),  a Jesuit  missionary,  drafted  a volume  on  Chinese 
music  (1780),  largely  from  native  sources,  though  with  what  accuracy  is  dis- 
puted. William  Jones  (d.  1794),  a judge  at  Calcutta,  wrote  ably  of  Hindu 
music  (1784). 

Out  of  the  many  musical  biographies  that  now  began  to  accumulate  a few 
may  be  instanced,  such  as  those  on  Vallotti  by  Sabbatini  (1780);  on 
Martini  by  Guglielmo  della  Valle  (1784-5);  on  various  composers  and  on 
Metastasio  by  J.  A.  Hiller  (1784-6);  on  Handel  by  Reichardt  (1785); 
on  Marcello  by  Sacchi  (1789)  ; on  Metastasio  by  Burney  (1796)  ; on  Pic- 
cinni  by  GinguenS  (1800)  ; on  Fasch  by  Zelter  (1801)  ; on  Naumann  by 
A.  G.  Meissner  (1803-4);  and  on  J.  S.  Bach  by  Forkel  (1803),  — the  last 
being  a work  of  decided  scholarship.  Autobiographies  were  given  out  by 
Schubart  (1791),  Spazier  (1792),  Ditters  (1799),  Reichardt  (1805)  and  Dulon 
(1807). 


40 6 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


Works  of  a dictionary  character  also  began  to  be  important,  such  as  those 
by  Sulzer  on  the  fine  arts  generally  (1772-99,  continued  by  Blankenburg)  ; 
by  Johann  Georg  Meusel  (d.  1820)  on  living  art-workers  (1778-1803);  by 
G.  F.  Wolf  on  terms,  etc.  (1787);  by  Joos  Verschuere-Reynvaan  (d.  1809) 
on  the  same  (1790-5,  only  to  ‘M’) — a pioneer  work  in  Dutch;  by 
Ernst  Ludwig  Gerber  (d.  1819),  two  invaluable  works  on  musicians  (1790- 
92,  1812-4)  ; besides  many  articles  (from  1794),  by  Johann  Gottfried  Geisler 
(d.  1827)  on  instruments  (1792-1800),  by  Knecht  on  terms  (1795),  and,  most 
scholarly  of  all,  by  Heinrich  Christoph  Koch  (d.  1816)  on  terms  (1802)  and 
on  musicians  (1807).  Johann  Wilhelm  Hertel  (d.  1789)  left  in  MS.  a 
volume  of  additions  (1752-60)  to  Walther’s  Lexicon , besides  editing  a 
collection  of  Italian  and  French  works  about  music  (1757-8). 

Throughout  the  half-century,  experiments  continued  with  periodicals  of 
different  sorts  — almost  20  in  all.  Most  of  these  lived  but  a short  time. 
The  conspicuous  exception  was  the  important  Allgemeine  musikalische  Zei- 
tung,  founded  at  Leipsic  in  1798,  probably  by  Friedrich  Rochlitz,  and  pub- 
lished by  Breitkopf  & Hartel,  which  continued  till  1848.  Several  of  the 
others,  though  not  permanent,  were  interesting  expressions  of  literary  enter- 
prise and  often  contained  articles  of  value. 

From  this  period  date  several  famous  publishing  houses,  such  as  that  of 
Schott  at  Mayence,  founded  about  1770  ; that  of  Andre  at  Offenbach,  founded 
in  1774  by  Johann  Andrd  (d.  1799)  an^  greatly  advanced  by  his  son  Johann 
Anton  Andr£  (d.  1842)  ; that  of  Artaria  at  Vienna,  founded  in  1778;  that 
of  Leuckart  at  Breslau  (now  Leipsic),  founded  in  1782  ; and  that  of  Simrock 
at  Bonn  and  Cologne  (now  Berlin),  founded  in  1790. 

The  process  of  lithography  having  been  invented  in  1798  by  Aloys  Sene- 
felder of  Munich,  it  was  immediately  applied  to  the  printing  of  music,  largely 
through  the  efforts  of  Franz  Gleissner  (d.  after  1815),  whose  own  first  sym- 
phony was  lithographed  in  1798.  Andrd  and  Breitkopf  & Hartel  were  prompt 
to  take  up  this  improvement. 

166.  Summary  of  the  Half-Century. — The  age  of  Haydn, 
Gluck  and  Mozart  presents  most  interesting  contrasts  with  both 
that  which  preceded  and  that  which  followed.  But  these  con- 
trasts differ  in  nature  and  in  intensity.  At  each  stage  we  see 
ideas  coming  to  consummation  that  had  long  been  germinating, 
but  the  three  stages  differ  in  the  ideas  Chosen  for  expression.  In 
passing  out  of  the  Bach-Handel  period  music  went  through  a 
sort  of  revolution,  and  again  in  entering  upon  the  19th  century 
it  experienced  another  revolution,  but  in  a different  direction. 

Beginning  with  Haydn’s  work,  a novel  type  of  musical  structure 
presented  itself.  The  attention  of  composers  now  swung  with 
emphasis  either  to  explicit  melodiousness  or  to  a harmony  that 
was  melodically  controlled.  The  organic  interdependence  of 
melody  and  form  was  more  clearly  apprehended.  And  there 


SUMMARY  OF  THE  HALF-CENTURY 


407 


was  a new  insight  into  the  nature  of  chords  and  the  philoso- 
phy of  arranging  them  in  sequence.  The  outlines  of  these 
ideas  had  long  been  visible,  steadily  developing  in  Italian  opera 
and  in  German  writing  of  various  kinds,  but  they  hardly  became 
regnant  until  the  Austrian  melodists  made  them  conspicuous. 
Hence  the  profound  difference  of  manner  between  most  music 
before  1750  and  that  afterward.  The  older  composers  had 
worked  with  the  instinct  of  true  counterpoint  or  of  a half-con- 
trapuntal harmony.  Now  we  encounter  rather  the  instinct  of 
the  pure  solo  song  or  of  a song-like  harmony.  In  short,  as  the 
controlling  factor  in  musical  conception,  monophony  now  fully 
replaces  mediaeval  polyphony.  That  this  principle,  first  per- 
ceived in  part  fully  two  centuries  before,  now  took  possession  of 
the  whole  range  of  composition,  is  a most  significant  fact. 

Closely  associated  with  this  was  the  general  acceptance  of  the 
modern  notion  of  tonality,  with  its  classification  of  chords  by 
their  relation  to  a definite  major  or  minor  key,  and  its  system  of 
relative  keys  radiating  in  several  directions,  into  which  modula- 
tion can  occur  by  definite  processes.  The  vague  and  shifting 
tonality  of  the  earlier  periods  was  at  last  given  up  — with  some 
loss  of  peculiar  effects,  but  with  an  evident  gain  in  unity  and 
consistency. 

We  now  notice  a great  advance  in  the  valuation  of  certain  in- 
strumental methods  as  compared  with  vocal.  The  chamber 
quartet  (or  other  small  group)  and  the  orchestra  now  for  the 
first  time  attain  their  modern  eminence.  There  was  a consequent 
emphasis  upon  every  device  in  the  nature  of  the  materials  or  in 
their  detailed  handling  that  should  make  the  total  result  clear,  in- 
teresting and  telling  for  its  own  sake,  apart  from  all  ideas  that 
may  be  conveyed  by  words.  Thus  the  interests  of  ‘absolute  music’ 
received  an  attention  wholly  new,  at  least  in  degree  and  signifi- 
cance. Following  close  upon  this  exaltation  of  the  ensemble 
of  solo  instruments,  came  the  rapid  rise  of  the  piano  as  a con- 
certed instrument  of  unsuspected  possibilities.  Although  some 
of  these  steps  had  been  previously  foreshadowed,  nothing  earlier 
had  more  than  a fraction  of  the  importance  of  what  was  now 
done. 

But  the  vocal  field  was  not  neglected.  Here  there  were  two 
events  of  capital  significance  — the  reclamation  of  the  opera  to 
dramatic  sanity  by  Gluck,  with  the  infusion  into  it  of  a more 


408 


THE  LATER  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


varied  and  vital  musical  content,  especially  by  Mozart,  and  the 
recognition  of  the  detached  song  as  an  object  worthy  of  serious 
artistic  attention.  These  movements  had  some  connection  with 
those  mentioned  above,  but  were  still  more  akin  to  the  new 
spirit  that  was  to  display  itself  after  1800.  In  these  two  quarters 
we  observe  the  subjective  and  romantic  impulses  of  the  future 
already  bestirring  themselves. 

In  pure  theory  the  period  lacked  the  guidance  of  any  one 
leader  of  the  first  order  of  constructive  genius,  except  that  of 
the  conservative  Martini,  but  in  research  and  criticism  it  made 
great  gains,  though  the  literary  aspect  of  the  art  was  still  far 
from  mature  or  adequate.  But  it  is  noteworthy  that  among 
thinkers  of  a broad  philosophic  scope  the  serious  consideration 
of  topics  relating  to  music  begins  to  have  a more  secure  and 
honorable  place. 

The  great  defects  of  the  period  were  those  of  the  age  as  a 
whole,  namely,  the  exaltation  of  conventional  regularity  over 
sincere  personal  conviction  or  feeling,  and  the  inevitable  drift 
toward  formalism  in  expression.  Yet,  although  this  stage  in 
development  naturally  produced  a great  mass  of  works  that  now 
seem  manneristic  and  hollow,  it  served  a purpose  in  fastening  at- 
tention upon  the  purely  external  charm  of  tonal  patterns  and 
qualities,  thus  providing  invaluable  ways  and  means  to  the 
period  following.  The  essential  importance  of  the  period  is 
shown  by  the  fact  that  the  styles  now  known  as  ‘ classical,’  as 
they  were  exemplified  by  the  greater  masters,  like  Haydn  and 
Mozart,  not  only  served  as  the  basis  or  model  for  all  work  in  the 
next  period,  but  have  held  their  place  to  some  degree  ever  since. 


Map  III.  — Germany  and  Austria. 


PART  VII 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


PART  VII 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 

Chap.  XXIV.  The  Advent  of  Beethoven. 

167.  General  Survey. 

168.  Beethoven’s  Historic  Place. 

169.  Salient  Features  of  his  Style. 

170.  His  Environment. 

Chap.  XXV.  The  Romantic  Opera  and  the  Song. 

1 71 . The  Genius  of  Weber. 

172.  The  Romantic  Opera. 

173.  Schubert’s  Brief  Career. 

174.  His  Works  and  Style. 

Chap.  XXVI.  Italian  and  French  Opera. 

175.  New  Life  in  the  Italian  Style. 

176.  Rossini,  Donizetti  and  Bellini. 

177.  The  French  Opera  Comique. 

178.  The  Historical  Opera. 

179.  Opera-Singers  and  Librettists. 

Chap.  XXVII.  Instrumental  Virtuosity. 

180.  Pianism  and  Pianists. 

1 8 1 . Violinism  and  Violinists. 

182.  Other  Instrumental  Music. 

183.  Problems  in  Instrument-Making. 

Chap.  XXVIII.  Church  and  Organ  Music. 

184.  Confused  Tendencies  in  Catholic  Music. 

185.  The  Revival  of  Protestant  Organ  Music. 

186.  Music  in  England. 

Chap.  XXIX.  Growth  of  Musical  Literature. 

187.  Musical  Publications. 

188.  Summary  of  the  Period. 


410 


CHAPTER  XXIV 


THE  ADVENT  OF  BEETHOVEN 

167.  General  Survey.  — The  treatment  of  the  19th  century  in 
musical  history  presents  many  serious  difficulties.  The  mere 
multitude  of  items  is  far  more  bewildering  than  in  any  previous 
period,  since,  for  example,  the  number  of  composers  to  be  con- 
sidered is  at  least  four  times  as  great  as  in  the  18th  century.  The 
division  of  the  material  into  classes  is  often  exceedingly  difficult, 
not  only  because  the  work  of  individual  composers  often  extends 
into  many  different  fields  of  production,  but  because  the  methods 
and  spirit  of  the  fields  themselves  cross  and  interpenetrate.  The 
essential  cosmopolitanism  of  music  becomes  more  conspicuous, 
arising  both  from  the  frequent  transfers  of  musicians  from  land 
to  land  and  from  the  ready  diffusion  of  their  printed  works.  All 
lines  of  development,  therefore,  become  more  complicated,  so 
that  summary  statements  require  incessant  qualifications. 

It  is  convenient  to  separate  the  century  roughly  into  three 
large  periods,  namely,  that  of  Beethoven,  Weber  and  Schubert 
(to  about  1830),  that  of  Mendelssohn,  Schumann  and  Chopin 
(to  about  i860),  and  that  of  Wagner  and  his  contemporaries, 
with  their  successors  to  the  present  time.  The  matters  to  be 
considered  under  these  three  divisions  do  not  necessarily  lie 
within  the  time-limits  named,  but  often  overlap  in  various  ways. 
Yet  for  clarity  of  thought  some  division  must  be  made. 

In  political  history  France  occupies  the  centre  of  the  stage.  The  18th 
century  had  closed  with  the  gigantic  convulsion  of  the  French  Revolu- 
tion, which  not  only  wrought  a bloody  transformation  in  France,  but 
shook  the  whole  of  Europe.  With  it  began  the  gradual  overthrow  of 
the  mediaeval  notion  of  society  as  existing  for  certain  privileged  classes, 
and  the  setting  up  of  the  modern  ideas  of  equality  and  liberty,  with  a 
new  valuation  of  the  individual  in  all  relations. 

But  before  the  fruits  of  the  Revolution  could  be  gathered  came  the 
amazing  career  of  Napoleon  (Consul,  1799-1804,  Emperor,  1804-15), 
with  his  audacious  intrigues  and  campaigns  for  supremacy  in  the  face  of 
all  Europe.  His  empire  was  strengthened  by  the  humiliation  of  Austria 
(Vienna  occupied,  1805,  ’09),  of  Prussia  (Berlin  taken,  1806),  of  Portugal 

411 


412 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


and  Spain,  and  of  the  Pope,  but  reverses  set  in  from  the  fruitless  invasion 
of  Russia  (1812),  and  the  end  of  his  dream  of  dominion  came  with  the 
battles  of  Leipsic  (1813)  and  Waterloo  (1815).  All  sorts  of  collateral 
struggles  grew  out  of  these,  such  as  the  War  of  1812  between  England 
and  America. 

When  at  length  Napoleon  was  displaced,  the  demand  for  popular 
liberty  under  constitutional  guarantees  again  became  insistent,  showing 
itself  in  repeated  revolutionary  undertakings  in  different  countries  far  on 
into  the  middle  of  the  century  — of  which  the  end  is  not  yet. 

The  principal  rulers  of  the  period  were,  in  France  (besides  Napoleon), 
Louis  XVIII.  (1814-24);  in  Austria,  Francis  I.  (1792-1835);  in 
Prussia,  Frederick  William  III.  (1797-1840)  ; in  England,  George  III. 
(1760-1820)  and  George  IV.  (1820-30);  and  in  Russia,  Alexander  I. 
(1801-24).  Without  trying  to  summarize  the  powerful  literary  influences 
of  the  time  in  any  of  the  leading  countries,  we  may  content  ourselves 
with  recalling  that  in  Germany  now  came  the  first  impress  of  philos- 
ophers like  Kant  (d.  1804),  Fichte  (d.  1814)  and  Hegel  (d.  1831),  and 
of  poets  like  Herder  (d.  1803),  Schiller  (d.  1805)  and  Goethe  (d.  1832). 
It  was  just  about  this  time  that  the  general  advance  of  method  began  in 
historical  and  physical  science  which  became  characteristic  of  the  whole 
century. 

In  the  musical  world  certain  salient  points  may  be  noted  about 
the  early  part  of  the  century.  First  of  these  is  the  dominance 
of  Beethoven  as  an  original,  epoch-making  genius  of  the  first 
rank  — one  who  made  himself  felt  immediately  and  whose  power 
has  not  since  departed,  in  spite  of  the  great  changes  in  recent 
years.  Next  comes  the  separation  under  Weber  of  the  German 
opera  as  a distinct  type,  incorporating  into  itself  some  of  the 
constructive  ideas  of  Gluck,  with  much  of  the  best  instrumental 
progress,  and  beginning  to  express  the  deeply  romantic  imagina- 
tion of  the  German  peoples.  Side  by  side  with  this  stood  a fresh 
illustration  of  the  inexhaustible  vitality  of  Italian  opera  under 
Rossini  and  others,  and  the  equally  fresh  renewal  of  French  opera 
under  Boieldieu  and  Auber.  Here  falls  the  memorable  work  of 
Schubert,  a melodist  of  endless  fertility,  especially  influential  in 
bringing  the  art-form  of  the  song  to  full  honor.  Pianism  and 
violinism  as  specialties  take  on  new  elaboration,  affecting  still 
more  the  whole  current  of  musical  expression.  The  sensational 
popular  power  of  the  virtuoso  is  repeatedly  demonstrated,  while 
the  activity  of  countless  teachers,  of  many  strong  music-schools 
and  of  choral  societies,  with  the  wider  scope  of  business  interests 
in  publishing  music  and  making  instruments,  is  creating  a vast 
public  of  musical  amateurs  and  well-wishers.  The  study  of 


THE  SPIRIT  OF  THE  AGE 


413 


musical  theory  in  all  its  parts,  and  the  publication  of  varied  works 
of  history  and  criticism,  continue  with  steadily  augmenting  in- 
fluence. 

The  conspicuous  note  of  the  age  was  a new  individualism, 
with  an  irrepressible  instinct  for  personal  freedom  in  thought 
and  feeling  as  well  as  in  political  and  social  relations.  Hence 
the  formalism  of  the  18th  century  began  to  be  disrupted  by  the 
unconventional  ideas  of  innovators  and  reconstructors.  The 
emphasis  began  to  be  transferred  from  regularity  to  originality, 
from  studied  restraint  or  indifference  to  free,  passionate,  even 
lawless  feeling,  from  conformity  to  academic  rule  to  outspoken 
self-revelation.  This  mighty  movement  toward  vital  truth, 
which  recalls  that  of  the  16th  century,  naturally  found  its  im- 
mediate expression  in  music.  Indeed,  it  is  from  this  period  that 
we  may  date  the  close  association  of  musical  art  with  the  inner 
spirit  of  modern  society. 

Vienna  continues  to  be  on  the  whole  the  chief  musical  centre,  with 
Paris  not  far  behind,  especially  as  regards  the  opera.  But  the  signs 
multiply  that  presently  various  German  capitals  are  to  become  more 
conspicuous,  since  the  leadership  in  musical  progress  is  now  passing 
emphatically  into  German  hands. 

168.  Beethoven’s  Historic  Place.  — Beethoven  is  commonly 
counted  one  of  the  three  supreme  musical  geniuses,  by  many 
the  greatest  of  the  three.  To  perceive  how  phenomenal  he  was 
one  must  needs  place  him  against  the  background  of  the  later 
1 8th  century  and  in  the  atmosphere  of  the  stirring  decades 
of  the  opening  19th.  We  must  recall  that  he  was  not  forty  years 
younger  than  Haydn  and  not  fifteen  years  younger  than  Mozart, 
so  that  his  early  maturity  came  just  when  their  sway  was  at  its 
height.  We  must  also  recall  that  in  him  wrought,  even  from 
youth,  the  progressive  instincts  of  a mighty  seer  and  leader, 
an  idealist  and  a creator.  Only  so  can  we  understand  with 
what  a shock  he  shook  the  whole  musical  world,  or  why  from  him 
is  dated  a new  era,  so  that  for  more  than  half  a century  after  his 
death  masters  in  the  upper  ranks  were  proud  to  call  themselves 
his  disciples. 

Beethoven  was  emphatically  an  innovator,  the  founder  of  a 
new  order.  Of  this,  however,  he  himself  was  probably  at  first 
unaware.  He  set  up  no  revolutionary  program  in  advance. 
His  own  thought  was  doubtless  “ not  to  destroy,  but  to  fulfill." 


414 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


But  the  quality  of  his  character  was  such  that  he  could  not  be 
true  to  himself  without  breaking  through  all  the  conventions  and 
rising  out  of  all  the  platitudes  of  the  age  into  which  he  came. 
Music  to  him  was  no  entertaining  kaleidoscope  of  tones  and 
rhythms,  but  the  warm  word  of  the  heart.  To  see  how  true 
this  was,  one  must  know  in  some  detail  the  story  of  his  life. 
It  must  be  added,  however,  that  this  story  should  be  interpreted 
always  by  the  message  of  his  music.  Life  and  art  are  here, 
probably  more  than  in  the  case  of  any  previous  composer,  in- 
separable. The  purely  psychological  problem  in  this  case  has 
perennial  interest.  But  the  fact  that  this  strange  personality  and 
this  inspired  genius  came  upon  the  stage  just  when  he  did,  also 
gives  his  career  unique  historical  importance.  His  advent  set 
forward  the  whole  process  of  musical  development  by  a star- 
tling leap,  the  momentum  of  which  lasted  long  afterward. 

Beethoven’s  life  may  be  variously  divided.  In  any  case  his  early  years  at 
Bonn  (1770-92)  stand  by  themselves.  At  Vienna  his  work  shows  three 
stages  or  4 manners,’  whose  limits  may  be  roughly  stated  thus : — ( a ) To  the 
conviction  that  his  deafness  was  incurable  (1802),  ( b ) to  his  last  public 
appearances  as  a player  and  the  beginning  of  his  guardianship  over  his 
nephew  (1814-5),  and  (c)  to  his  death  (1827).  This  makes  four  periods  in 
all,  but  the  line  between  the  first  and  second  4 manners  ’ is  indistinct. 

Ludwig  van  Beethoven  (d.  1827)  was  born  in  1770  at  Bonn  on  the  Rhine. 
On  the  father’s  side  he  came  of  Belgian  stock,  his  grandfather  (d.  1773),  an 
able  musician,  having  come  from  Antwerp  to  the  Electoral  Chapel  at  Bonn  in 
1 733  (choirmaster  from  1761).  His  father  (d.  1792)  was  a singer  in  the 
Chapel  since  1756  — an  intemperate,  shiftless  and  harsh  man.  His  mother 
(d.  1787)  came  from  Ehrenbreitstein — apparently  a sweet  and  gentle  char- 
acter. Of  the  seven  children,  three  sons  survived,  Ludwig  the  eldest,  Caspar 
(d.  1815)  and  Johann  (d.  1848). 

Beethoven’s  boyhood  was  made  painful  by  poverty  and  by  the  eagerness 
of  the  father  to  use  the  boy’s  talents  to  make  money.  He  was  silent  and 
sensitive,  not  fond  of  play,  and  received  but  a slight  education  except  in 
music.  His  precocity  in  the  latter  led  to  comparisons  with  Mozart.  He  had 
lessons  at  4,  played  in  public  at  8,  composed  a cantata  and  some  variations  at 
10,  assisted  his  first  good  teacher,  Neefe,  the  court-organist,  at  12,  became 
cembalist  or  conductor  at  the  theatre  at  13,  and  had  his  first  salary  as  assist- 
ant organist  at  14.  In  1787  he  somehow  managed  to  visit  Vienna,  there 
meeting  Mozart,  who  prophesied  that  he  would  44  make  a noise  in  the  world.” 
In  1788  the  Elector  reorganized  his  opera-troupe,  attracting  to  it  several  noted 
musicians.  Beethoven  had  useful  violin-lessons  from  Ries,  and  played  the 
viola  in  the  orchestra.  From  1789  part  of  his  father’s  salary  was  paid  to  him 
as  conservator.  In  1790  and  again  in  1792  Haydn  passed  through  Bonn.  In 
1791  the  Elector  took  his  establishment  up  the  Rhine  to  Mergentheim,  where 


BEETHOVEN 


415 


Beethoven  heard  Sterkel  play  and  won  notice  by  his  own  extemporizations. 
By  1792  he  had  produced  some  compositions,  largely  piano-variations,  had 
begun  the  lifelong  habit  of  keeping  ‘ sketch-books 1 for  recording  and 
elaborating  his  musical  ideas  and  was 
recognized  as  a pianist  of  extraordinary 
power.  He  had  also  begun  to  win  the 
friendship  of  cultivated  people,  notably 
Mme.  von  Breuning  and  Count  Wald- 
stein,  who  were  of  the  utmost  value  to 
him  socially  and  mentally.  In  1792, 
perhaps  at  Haydn’s  suggestion,  the 
Elector  gave  him  leave  to  remove  to 
Vienna,  where  apparently  his  only  sup- 
port at  first  was  his  salary  of  150 
florins,  which  ceased  in  1794. 

At  Vienna  Beethoven  for  two  years 
had  lessons  in  counterpoint  from  Haydn 
(secretly  also  from  Schenk),  and  for 
about  a year  from  Albrechtsberger. 

He  was  a conscientious  pupil,  but 
both  teachers  regarded  his  radical  im- 
pulses with  distrust.  He  also  consulted 

Salieri  and  Forster.  He  made  his  way  among  wealthy  and  intelligent  ama- 
teurs, like  the  Lichnowskys,  Van  Swieten  and  Lobkowitz,  thus  securing 
some  teaching,  much  warm  appreciation,  and  substantial  help  for  the  per- 
formance of  compositions.  He  was  always  dependent  upon  such  patronage, 
simply  because  at  that  time  there  was  no  other  way  for  a musician  to  subsist. 
That  he  not  only  kept  his  many  powerful  friends,  but  fascinated  them,  was 
remarkable  in  the  face  of  his  low  origin,  uncouth  manners,  extreme  sensi- 
tiveness and  unaccountable  moods.  That  he  repaid  their  forbearance  with 
esteem  is  shown  by  the  long  list  of  his  dedications  of  important  works.  He 
was  often  violent  in  judgment  and  speech,  so  that  he  alienated  many  who 
were  not  sensible  of  his  innate  worth.  He  came  into  immediate  competition 
with  the  popular  pianists  of  the  day,  vanquishing  those  who  essayed  to 
meet  him  openly.  The  profound  expressiveness  of  his  playing,  with  his  com- 
mand of  technique  and  structure,  was  seen  to  be  unrivaled. 

Amid  these  stimulating  circumstances  his  creative  powers  now  gradually 
came  into  action,  though  used  with  a unique  caution,  every  work  being 
developed  slowly,  often  with  great  alterations,  and  put  forth  only  in  what  he 
felt  to  be  its  final  shape.  The  first  great  productions  date  from  about  1795, 
including  3 trios,  3 sonatas,  a concerto  and  the  scena  Adelaide ; in  that  year 
he  also  began  public  playing.  In  1796  he  visited  Nuremberg,  Prague  and 
Berlin,  decidedly  enlarging  his  acquaintance  and  his  renown.  Composition 
became  his  consuming  occupation.  By  1800,  besides  lesser  works,  the  sep- 
tet, 6 quartets,  about  10  sonatas  and  the  First  Symphony  were  completed. 
What  he  wrote  commanded  the  enthusiasm  of  the  public  and  good  prices 
from  publishers.  He  entered  the  field  of  the  drama  with  the  ballet  Prome- 
theus and  that  of  oratorio  with  The  Mount  of  Olives  (not  given  till  1803), 


4i  6 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


while  the  stream  of  piano  and  chamber  works  went  on.  But  amid  all  this 
success  he  had  increasing  trouble  with  his  hearing,  which  by  1802  reached  a 
point  where  it  menaced  his  mental  balance,  as  is  evidenced  by  the  passionate 
letter,  addressed  to  his  brothers,  which  is  commonly  called  his  ‘ Will  ’ — one 
of  the  few  intimate  revelations  in  words  of  his  inner  life. 

Notwithstanding  many  serious  drawbacks  to  be  named,  the  dozen  years 
before  1815  were  indescribably  fruitful  and  brilliant.  The  flow  of  inspiration 
was  at  its  height,  and  leading  publishers  were  ready  to  transmit  its  products 
to  the  world.  The  sequence  of  only  the  greater  works  can  be  noted  here,  the 
dates  given  being,  as  far  as  possible,  those  of  composition  rather  than  of 
publication.  Of  the  piano-sonatas,  Nos.  12-15  were  written  in  1801,  Nos. 
16-20  in  1802,  Nos.  21  and  23  (‘Waldstein’  and  ‘ Appassionata  ’)  in  1804, 
No.  22  in  1805,  No.  25  in  1808,  Nos.  24  and  26  in  1809,  and  No.  27  in  1814. 
The  ‘ Kreutzer1  sonata  for  violin  belongs  to  1803  and  the  ’cello-sonata  in  A 
probably  to  1808.  The  three  ‘ Rasumowsky  ’ quartets  date  from  1806-7,  the 
sextet  in  E^  from  1809,  the  quartet  in  F minor  from  1810.  The  triple  con- 
certo comes  from  1804,  the  fourth  piano-concerto  from  about  1805  and  the 
fifth  from  1809.  The  Third  or  ‘Heroic’  symphony  (originally  planned  in 
honor  of  Napoleon)  was  completed  in  1804,  the  Fourth  in  1806,  the  Fifth  and 
Sixth  (‘Pastoral’)  in  1808,  the  Seventh  and  Eighth  in  1812.  The  overture 
to  Coriolanus  belongs  to  1807,  the  music  for  Egmont  to  1810,  that  for  The 
Ruins  of  Athens  and  for  King  Stephen  to  1811.  The  Mass  in  C was  com- 
posed about  1807  and  the  cantata  Der  glorreiche  Augenblick  in  1814.  The 
opera  Fidelio  was  perhaps  begun  in  1803,  but  first  given  in  1805,  just  after  the 
French  occupied  Vienna,  and,  after  successive  revisals,  in  1806  and  1814. 
When  one  considers  the  magnitude  and  variety  of  these  many  works,  and 
especially  the  essential  novelty  of  their  contents,  it  is  easy  to  see  with  what 
an  astonishing  decade  the  century  opened. 

The  turmoil  of  artistic  creation  — always  extreme  in  Beethoven’s  case  — 
was  intensified  by  several  complications.  The  catastrophe  of  his  deafness 
steadily  became  more  oppressive  and  disabling,  inducing  physical  and  mental 
irritation,  shutting  him  off  from  society  and  friendship,  and  from  1814  bring- 
ing his  career  as  a public  virtuoso  to  a close.  He  was  again  and  again  des- 
perately in  love,  in  two  or  three  cases  with  women  of  the  upper  classes,  but 
was  always  thwarted  by  the  fact  of  his  low  origin,  the  uncertainty  of  his 
fortune  or  the  infelicities  of  his  temperament.  The  management  of  practical 
affairs,  from  the  securing  of  lodgings  to  the  performance  and  publication  of 
compositions,  occasioned  him  infinite  discomfort  and  worry.  He  held  no 
official  position  and  had  no  fixed  income.  In  1808  Jerome  Bonaparte  invited 
him  to  be  choirmaster  at  Cassel.  This  led  a trio  of  noblemen  in  1809  to 
assure  him  an  annual  stipend  of  about  $2,000,  if  he  would  remain  at  Vienna, 
to  continue  until  he  should  receive,  as  was  hoped,  a post  at  the  court.  The 
struggle  with  France,  however,  so  depreciated  the  Austrian  currency  that 
the  net  amount  soon  shrank  to  $800  and  finally  to  $550,  and  part  of  this 
involved  prolonged  lawsuits.  In  spite,  therefore,  of  the  extraordinary  brilliance 
of  these  years,  Beethoven  was  subjected  to  extreme  strain  and  his  health  was 
often  far  from  good.  Just  before  1815,  however,  matters  improved  and  it 
seemed  as  if  a happier  period  was  to  follow. 


BEETHOVEN 


417 


Late  in  1815  his  brother  Caspar  died,  leaving  to  him  the  guardianship  of 
a son,  then  not  nine  years  old.  This  charge  proved  a progressive  and  cul- 
minating disaster.  Beethoven  believed  it  necessary  to  separate  the  boy  from 
his  mother’s  influence,  but  to  do  this  required  lawsuits  which  lasted  till  1820. 
He  lavished  upon  the  lad  the  pent-up  affection  of  his  nature,  but  often  with 
such  wrong-headed  intensity  as  to  alienate  his  best  friends  and  exhaust  him- 
self in  all  sorts  of  practical  entanglements,  besides  seriously  checking  his 
artistic  production.  To  crown  all,  the  nephew  was  singularly  unworthy, 
being  stupid,  lazy,  ungrateful  and  morally  at  least  weak ; he  failed  in  study 
and  in  business,  and  in  1826  actually  attempted  suicide,  for  which  fiasco  he 
was  banished  from  Vienna.  (He  finally  went  into  the  army,  and  died  in 
1858.)  Beethoven  went  with  him  to  the  farm  of  the  third  brother  Johann, 
where  he  was  thoroughly  unhappy.  Late  in  1826  he  decided  to  return  to 
Vienna,  took  a violent  cold  on  the  journey,  contracted  dropsy,  and,  after 
much  suffering,  died  in  March,  1827,  the  end  coming  amid  a terrific  thunder- 
storm. The  funeral  drew  a great  concourse  and  was  conducted  with  the 
utmost  respect  and  reverence. 

The  recital  of  these  events  is  necessary  to  the  understanding  of  the  record 
of  the  last  period  of  his  artistic  life.  Upon  the  perpetual  agony  of  deafness, 
which  became  almost  absolute,  were  piled  the  manifold  distresses  connected 
vyith  the  scapegrace  nephew.  The  internal  struggles  of  the  composer’s  mind 
had  no  adequate  vent  except  through  composition,  and,  while  the  number 
of  works  produced  now  became  relatively  small,  their  size,  intricacy  and 
significance  were  vastly  increased.  Almost  everything  was  laid  out  upon  a 
titanic  scale,  as  if  to  achieve  the  impossible.  Of  the  piano-sonatas,  No.  28 
dates  from  1815,  No.  29  from  1818-9,  No.  30  perhaps  from  1820,  and  Nos. 
31  and  32  from  1821-2.  The  final  quartets  were  produced  in  1824-6,  that  in 
B7  being  his  last  work.  The  overture  Die  Weihe  des  Hauses  belongs  to 
1822.  The  Ninth  or  1 Choral’  Symphony  was  begun  in  1817  and  completed 
in  1823.  The  Missa  solennis,  originally  intended  for  the  installation  of  the 
Archbishop  of  Olrniitz  in  1820,  was  begun  in  1818,  but  not  finished  till  1823. 
In  his  last  years  Beethoven  came  to  feel  that  what  he  had  produced  was 
insignificant  in  comparison  with  what  remained  in  his  mind.  Of  these  pro- 
jected works  we  have  but  slight  indications,  though  we  know  that  they  were 
to  include  a great  Requiem  and  a Tenth  Symphony,  of  the  latter  of  which 
some  sketches  have  been  identified. 

In  personal  appearance  Beethoven  was  short,  stocky  and  muscular.  His 
movements  were  angular  and  absent-minded,  and  his  dress  often  careless  or 
odd  in  the  extreme.  His  face  was  full  of  strength,  but  its  expression  was 
usually  stern  and  forbidding.  But  it  was  a sure  index  of  his  mood,  and  could 
vary  instantly  from  genial  courtesy  to  boisterous  mirth  or  the  flare  of  anger. 
His  eyes  were  dark  and  piercing,  and  his  hair  black,  thick  and  coarse. 

He  was  wont  to  spend  his  mornings  and  evenings  in  labor  at  the  piano  or 
his  table,  often  becoming  intensely  excited  and  absorbed  in  the  travail  of 
composition.  His  afternoons  he  loved  to  pass  in  the  open  country,  where  he 
often  conducted  himself  so  wildly  as  to  seem  insane.  His  concentration  upon 
his  work  was  always  complete,  but  the  realization  of  his  thoughts  cost  infinite 
apparent  pain  and  contest  — more  than  in  the  case  of  any  other  composer  of 


418 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


the  first  rank.  Hence  his  habitual  mien  was  restless,  perturbed,  or  passion- 
ately eager. 

In  character  he  was  the  soul  of  truth  and  honor,  but  given  to  freakish  mis- 
understandings and  resentments.  His  temper  varied  from  warm  affection  for 
his  friends  to  unreasonable  aversion  and  abuse.  He  was  excessively  sensitive 
to  both  condescension  and  fancied  slights,  and  was  liable  to  go  off  into  a rage 
on  imaginary  provocations.  His  manners  were  often  uncouth,  his  speech 
uncontrolled  and  his  actions  sometimes  violent.  Yet  the  force  and  nobility 
of  his  manliness  were  obvious,  so  that  he  fastened  to  himself  not  only  the 
respect,  but  the  affection,  of  numerous  intelligent  friends.  Latent  within  him 
was  a wealth  of  love  and  devotion  which  he  longed  to  expend,  but  which 
never  found  an  object  on  which  to  rest.  Temperamentally  religious  in  a high 
degree,  he  was  so  uninstructed  that  his  only  creed  was  a curious  catena  of 
pantheistic  propositions,  while  his  practical  action  was  governed  by  the 
simplest  elemental  instincts  of  uprightness. 

His  physical  and  mental  constitution  involved  him  in  ceaseless  contra- 
diction and  struggle.  Doubtless  he  inherited  bodily  infirmities,  which  were 
intensified  by  irregular  living,  so  that  his  body  and  mind  reacted  unfortunately 
upon  each  other.  Yet  even  in  his  worst  conflicts  there  was  something  heroic 
and  sublime  about  him.  Of  this  higher  or  deeper  nature  his  music  was  verily 
the  voice,  so  vital  and  commanding  that  to  it  all  the  world  was  forced  to 
listen. 

169.  Salient  Features  of  his  Style.  — One  of  the  most  striking 
characteristics  of  Beethoven’s  work  is  the  difference  between 
his  earlier  and  his  later  style.  This  difference  is  not  simply 
due  to  the  ordinary  growth  in  mastery  on  the  part  of  one  who 
starts  as  a scholar,  for  even  the  earliest  style  is  masterly  in  its 
way.  It  is  rather  the  expression  of  profound  psychical  changes, 
which  induced  him  to  attempt  ever  new  methods  of  utterance. 

That  which  throws  greatest  light  upon  this  process  is  the  existence  of 
a long  line  of  ‘ sketch-books,1  recording  more  or  less  clearly  the  steps 
through  which  he  approached  almost  all  of  his  significant  works. 
Although  somewhat  analogous  cases  of  artistic  growth  may  be  cited,  in 
none  of  them  is  the  degree  of  change  so  extraordinary  or  the  process  of 
it  so  minutely  traceable. 

It  has  long  been  customary  to  classify  his  work  under  three 
successive  ‘ manners.’  Beethoven  himself  recognized  the  transi- 
tions between  these,  and  they  have  been  extensively  elaborated 
by  historians  and  critics.  The  division  is  useful,  if  not  defined 
too  sharply  by  mere  dates.  In  external  form,  the  works  of  the 
first  period  closely  follow  the  orderly  methods  of  Mozart,  those 
of  the  second  present  increasing  impulsive  deviations  from  strict 
regularity  — abrupt  shifts,  expanded  episodes,  a marked  tendency 


BEETHOVEN 


419 


to  let  the  material  dictate  new  idioms  — and  those  of  the  third 
often  show  the  positive  overbalancing  of  all  formal  factors  by 
the  stress  of  self-expression,  so  that  the  result  is  difficult, 
abstruse,  occasionally  almost  incoherent.  Even  in  the  first 
‘ manner,’  we  notice  the  composer’s  desire  to  say  something,  to 
communicate,  rather  than  merely  to  make  something  imperson- 
ally attractive.  In  the  second,  this  greatly  increases,  showing 
itself  sometimes  in  impatient  or  humorous  caprice,  sometimes 
in  novel  and  daring  cumulations  of  energy  and  animation, 
sometimes  in  wistful  pathos  or  ecstatic  elevation,  but  with  all 
elements  under  perfect  artistic  control.  In  the  third,  the  sub- 
jective values  are  not  only  intensified,  but  often  marked  by  a 
different  quality.  The  conceptions  are  usually  gigantic,  the 
strain  of  emotion  constant  and  even  agonized,  the  sense  of 
struggle  more  pervasive.  By  common  consent  these  final  works 
are  felt  to  represent  one  of  the  highest  efforts  of  musical  art 
to  utter  the  deepest  experiences  of  the  human  spirit.  But  to 
appreciate  them  requires  a perception  made  sympathetic  both 
by  study  and  by  much  acquaintance  with  life. 

The  merely  technical  innovations  of  Beethoven  are  relatively 
few.  His  prevailing  general  method  is  that  of  the  sonata, 
though  he  was  also  fond  of  variations.  Within  the  sonata  out- 
lines he  was  freer  than  his  predecessors  in  key-contrasts  and 
modulation,  the  constituent  materials  were  far  better  connected 
and  blended,  his  * subjects  ’ strikingly  fresh  and  telling,  especially 
in  rhythmic  structure,  his  subsidiary  matter  and  episodes  often 
raised  into  great  prominence,  and  his  introductions  and  codas 
sometimes  surprisingly  expanded  and  enriched.  His  frequent 
replacing  of  the  stiff  minuet  by  a piquant  or  fiery  scherzo  was  a 
genuine  novelty,  as  was  also  his  building  out  of  some  extended 
works  by  means  of  a grand  finale,  sometimes  in  variation-form. 
He  was  singularly  free  from  dependence  upon  stock-phrases  or 
conventional  passages,  as  well  as  from  mannerisms  of  his  own. 
All  this  illustrates  not  only  his  originality,  but  how  radical  was 
his  revolt  from  the  habitual  commonplaces  of  the  18th  century. 

His  melodic  freshness  and  richness  are  conspicuous,  surpassing  even 
Mozart’s  in  many  ways.  The  difference  lies  in  extension  of  phrase,  fullness 
of  harmonic  substance,  power  of  climacteric  and  often  pathetic  suggestion, 
readiness  of  development  and  transformation.  Every  passage  has  its  own 
character,  individual  and  unmistakable,  and  each  is  fraught  with  meaning 


420 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


as  well  as  formal  beauty.  Much  of  the  vigor  of  his  themes  is  dynamic 
and  rhythmic.  He  was  one  of  the  first  to  realize  how  fully  the  vitality 
and  point  of  musical  thought  depends  upon  these  elements  in  design. 
His  directions  about  shading  and  other  features  of  expression  were  im- 
perative and  minute. 

His  harmonic  method  is  an  obvious  expansion  of  that  of  the  Haydn- 
Mozart  age,  peculiar  chiefly  in  its  greater  freedom,  especially  in  contrasts 
and  shifts.  Counterpoint,  as  a rule,  he  uses  more  incidentally  than  with 
consistent  deliberation,  except  in  certain  of  his  later  works.  Even  then 
he  is  very  free  to  modify  details  so  as  to  heighten  emotional  effect. 

His  instinct  for  instrumentation  was  acute.  He  greatly  advanced  the 
range  of  pianism  by  his  perception  of  the  piano’s  possibilities.  He 
elevated  music  for  the  violin  and  other  solo  instruments  by  giving  it  more 
to  say,  and  by  making  technique  the  servant  of  ideas.  The  orchestra  he 
wielded  with  imperial  mastery,  bringing  to  light  beauties  of  combination 
or  alternation,  and  devices  of  sonority  and  grandeur  that  have  never  since 
been  forgotten. 

His  treatment  of  the  voice  is  on  the  whole  not  so  sympathetic  or 
successful.  Of  songs  he  wrote  many,  those  of  more  or  less  dramatic 
quality  being  specially  fine.  His  union  of  soloists  and  chorus  with  the 
orchestra  in  the  Ninth  Symphony  was  almost  an  absolute  novelty,  but 
was  effected  from  the  orchestral  point  of  view.  His  distinctly  choral 
works,  such  as  his  masses,  are  similarly  conceived.  His  one  opera  and  his 
one  oratorio  more  or  less  illustrate  the  same  point. 

The  core  of  Beethoven’s  style  is  instrumental,  but  in  a very 
much  more  advanced  sense  than  in  the  case  of  Haydn.  The 
older  master  worked  along  lines  of  conception  and  execution 
that  still  betrayed  their  derivation  from  vocal  methods.  With 
Beethoven  there  comes  to  the  front  a new  structural  technique, 
resting  frankly  upon  principles  not  suggested  by  either  the  folk- 
song or  the  choral  motet.  In  this  regard,  far  more  than  in  any  in- 
novation as  to  external  form,  lies  one  of  the  main  reasons  for  his 
epoch-making  influence.  While  apparently  adopting  the  estab- 
lished procedures  of  his  time,  he  came  to  regard  them  from  a 
new  point  of  view,  so  that  the  inner  texture  of  his  greater  works 
was  wholly  modern. 

Another  general  remark  concerns  the  dramatic  spirit  that  per- 
vades much  of  his  strongest  work.  Of  explicit  drama  he  wrote 
little,  since  he  vainly  sought  for  acceptable  texts,  but  it  needs 
no  acumen  to  see  dramatic  explanations  for  the  way  in  which, 
even  in  purely  instrumental  works,  he  arranges  and  marshals  his 
material.  Ingenious  contrasts  of  character,  intricate  interplay 
of  opposing  forces,  absorbing  development  of  situation  and 


BEETHOVEN 


421 


climax  — all  these  may  again  and  again  be  discerned.  These 
qualities  escape  verbal  statement  in  analyzing  given  cases, 
simply  because  words  are  too  concrete  to  describe  the  abstract 
plot  implied,  though,  of  course,  the  tone-forms  by  which  the  plot 
is  enacted  are  themselves  intensely  concrete.  Beethoven  there- 
fore verged  closely  upon  ‘ program-music,’  but  he  himself  warns 
us  against  too  definite  a visual  or  verbal  interpretation  of  what 
is  meant.  In  this  dramaticness  of  conception  he  is  again  highly 
modern. 

No  one  can  possibly  overlook  the  tremendous  sincerity  and 
seriousness  of  purpose  in  Beethoven’s  art.  He  came  at  a time 
when  to  make  music  was  chiefly  to  offer  a refined  amusement 
to  the  privileged  and  luxurious.  He  himself,  notwithstanding  the 
utter  democracy  of  his  nature,  was  always  dependent  upon  aris- 
tocratic patronage  and  was  impelled  to  express  himself  in  terms 
that  only  high  mental  culture  could  understand.  Yet  he  made 
no  bid  for  ordinary  popularity,  offered  no  concessions  to  the 
tastes  of  patrons,  made  no  displays  to  catch  attention  from  either 
the  unlearned  or  the  learned.  He  attempted  only  what  he  felt 
to  be  worthy  in  itself,  what  appealed  to  his  own  exalted  man- 
hood, what  he  believed  was  inherently  true  and  beautiful.  His 
success,  in  his  own  day  and  since,  shows  how  truly  representa- 
tive he  was  of  the  ideal  human  spirit.  We  now  know,  much 
more  than  did  most  of  those  who  were  then  defining  the  prin- 
ciples of  aesthetic  criticism,  that  in  such  sincerity  and  seriousness, 
when  proceeding  from  an  essentially  noble  character,  lies  the 
finest  possibility  of  art. 

For  all  these  reasons  — and  more  that  might  be  given  — we 
do  well  to  exalt  Beethoven  as  the  founder  of  modern  musical  art. 

Beethoven’s  works  may  be  succinctly  classified  thus: — (a)  For  the 
piano  alone,  32  large  sonatas  for  2 hands  and  one  for  4,  with  over  100 
smaller  pieces,  including  many  variations  and  dances ; ( b ) for  piano  with 

other  instruments,  5 concertos,  1 triple  concerto,  8 trios,  3 quartets,  1 
quintet ; (c)  for  chamber  instruments,  9 violin-sonatas,  1 violin-concerto, 

5 ’cello-sonatas,  1 horn-sonata,  5 trios,  16  quartets,  2 quintets,  2 sextets,  1 
septet,  2 octets,  besides  some  other  pieces  ; ( d ) for  orchestra,  9 sympho- 

nies, 12  overtures,  with  other  incidental  numbers  for  dramas,  1 choral  fan- 
tasia, perhaps  10  minor  works;  ( e ) for  voices,  1 opera,  1 oratorio,  2 masses, 
with  about  10  cantatas  or  similar  works,  several  concert-solos,  almost 
250  songs,  including  about  160  written  to  Scotch,  Irish  and  Welsh  words 
at  the  suggestion  of  George  Thomson  of  Edinburgh,  18  canons.  A stand- 
ard complete  edition  is  published  by  Breitkopf  & Hartel  (1862-1904). 


422 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


Elaborate  publications  have  been  made  of  his  extant  exercises  in  coun- 
terpoint and  of  the  numerous  ‘ sketch-books.’  Also  over  500  letters  have 
been  edited. 

170.  His  Immediate  Environment. — A peculiar  interest  at- 
taches to  the  circle  of  persons  in  which  Beethoven’s  person- 
ality developed  and  exercised  itself.  Although  he  had  early 
discipline  in  playing  the  piano  and  violin,  and  in  composition, 
apparently  he  got  little  more  from  teachers  than  some  useful 
foundations.  That  which  made  him  great  was  his  own.  But, 
especially  at  Vienna,  he  was  much  in  contact  with  a large 
number  of  musicians,  many  of  considerable  power,  from  some 
of  whom  he  derived  valuable  stimulus.  Even  in  his  youth  at 
Bonn  he  began  to  know  the  operas  and  church  music  of  the 
day,  and  at  Vienna  he  doubtless  kept  in  touch  with  most  of  the 
dramatic  and  concert  works  there  popular.  It  is  not  clear  that 
he  was  much  of  a student,  except  in  the  pianistic  and  orches- 
tral fields  that  were  his  specialties.  Very  few  of  the  composers 
whom  he  knew  aroused  his  enthusiasm  ; for  many  of  them  he 
had  nothing  but  disdain  and  scorn.  His  deafness  and  his 
conscious  superiority  usually  combined  to  keep  him  aloof  from 
ordinary  musical  society.  His  isolation  would  certainly  have 
been  greater  than  it  was  had  it  not  been  for  the  earnest  and 
persistent  enthusiasm  that  he  evoked  among  aristocratic  ama- 
teurs. 

He  gave  many  lessons,  but  mostly  to  those  who  made  no 
striking  application  of  them  in  professional  activity.  He  was 
too  individual  and  too  idealistic  to  be  a successful  routine 
teacher.  He  certainly  founded  no  ‘ school  ’ of  followers.  His 
immense  ability  and  eclat  actually  overshadowed  several  com- 
posers who  were  working  along  somewhat  similar  lines  with 
himself,  though  this  result  was  not  of  his  seeking. 

Beethoven’s  most  useful  teachers  were  C.  G.  Neefe  (d.  1798),  organist 
at  Bonn  from  1781,  from  whom  he  parted  in  1792  with  much  respect,  and 
Franz  Ries  (d.  1846),  violinist  at  Bonn  from  1774,  whose  son  Ferdinand 
(d.  1838)  was  1801-5  one  of  Beethoven’s  pupils  and  helpers  at  Vienna; 
besides  the  veterans  Haydn , Schenk , Albrecht sberger  and  Salieri.  He 
was  a careful  student  of  the  works  of  Emanuel  Bach,  Clementi,  Mozart 
and  Cherubini.  The  style  of  the  latter  appealed  to  him  so  much  that  he 
said  he  meant  to  imitate  it  in  sacred  works  which  he  did  not  live  to  pro- 
duce. He  derived  something  from  Emanuel  Aloys  Forster  (d.  1823),  a 
worthy  writer  of  piano  and  chamber  works. 


BEETHOVEN'S  ENVIRONMENT 


423 


At  Vienna  among  his  intimates  were  the  violinists  Wenzel  Krumpholtz 
(d.  1817)  and  Schuppanzigh  (d.  1830),  the  ’cellist  Joseph  Linke  (d.  1837), 
the  violinist  Schindler  (d.  1864),  the  mechanician  Malzel  (d.  1838)  and 
the  publisher  Haslinger  (d.  1842).  Other  leading  violinists  of  the  city 
from  1800  were  May  seder  (d.  1863)  and  Franz  Clement  (d.  1842),  with 
the  violist  Franz  Weiss  (d.  1830).  He  knew  a long  line  of  pianists, 
some  with  admiration,  some  with  unconcealed  dislike,  such  as  Hummel , 
Wolf Prmce  Louis  Ferdmand  (at  Berlin),  Hitnmel , Steibelt , Gelinek , 
Vogler , Moscheles,  Halm  and  Huttenbrenner . He  gave  lessons  to  Czerny, 
and  in  1823  welcomed  the  boy  Liszt.  During  his  life  the  Austrian  opera- 
writers  most  active  at  Vienna  were  Gyrowetz  (d.  1850),  Weigl  (d.  1846), 
who  was  Salieri’s  colleague  and  successor  at  the  court,  Sey fried  (d.  1841) 
and  Konradin  Kreutzer  (d.  1849)  5 and  among  those  more  identified  with 
sacred  music  were  Eybler  (d.  1846),  Blahagk  (d.  1846),  Gansbacher  (d. 
1844),  Drechsler  (d.  1852)  and  Sechter  (d.  1867).  No  mention  can  here 
be  made  of  the  many  artists  who  spent  but  a brief  time  in  Vienna,  prom- 
inent among  whom  were  Pair,  Weber  and  Spohr.  Schubert  lived  his 
whole  life  there,  but  made  no  personal  expression  of  his  reverence  for  the 
older  master  till  the  latter’s  last  days. 

Space  fails  adequately  to  mention  the  great  circle  of  patrons  and 
friends  to  whose  appreciation,  liberality  and  forbearance  Beethoven  owed 
so  much.  It  is  interesting  to  recount  the  more  than  50  distinguished 
persons  whom  he  honored  by  dedications  of  works.  Prominent  among 
these  were  the  Von  Breuning  family,  Count  Waldstein,  Prince  and  Prin- 
cess Lichnowsky,  Prince  Lobkowitz,  Count  and  Countess  Browne,  Arch- 
duke Rudolph,  Count  Fries,  Prince  Galitzin,  Princess  Kinsky,  Countess 
Keglivics,  and  the  Russian  ambassador  Count  Rasumowsky,  besides  the 
Empress  Maria  Theresa,  the  King  of  Prussia  and  the  Emperor  and  Em- 
press of  Russia.  As  a rule,  these  dedications  signify  relations  that  were 
much  more  than  formal  or  ceremonious.  The  formation  of  the  Lichnowsky 
quartet  (about  1793)  and  the  Rasumowsky  quartet  (1808),  both  led  by 
Schuppanzigh,  had  much  to  do  with  the  growth  of  his  chamber  music. 
(Lichnowsky  and  Rasumowsky  both  married  daughters  of  Countess 
Thun.) 


CHAPTER  XXV 


THE  ROMANTIC  OPERA  AND  THE  SONG 

171.  The  Genius  of  Weber.  — Parallel  with  the  latter  half  of 
Beethoven’s  career  was  that  of  Weber,  who  shares  with  him 
the  honor  of  unlocking  the  musical  productiveness  of  Germany. 
Weber,  though  also  a pianist,  stands  contrasted  in  his  less 
thorough  discipline  as  a composer,  in  his  shining  gifts  for  social 
and  practical  success,  and  in  the  objectivity  of  his  imagination. 
He  was  the  exponent,  not  so  much  of  a universal  humanity  as 
of  the  peculiar  phase  of  national  awakening  through  which 
Germany  was  passing.  He  accordingly  aroused  an  instant 
enthusiasm  which  had  notable  fruits. 

Weber  made  his  mark  as  a keyboard  virtuoso,  ready,  original 
and  daring,  and  made  large  contributions  to  piano  literature ; 
but  his  significance  lies  in  his  sudden  elevation  of  the  German 
opera  into  renown,  and  his  expansion  of  the  range  of  orchestral 
expression.  His  general  dramatic  ideal  was  like  that  of  Gluck 
and  Mozart,  but  he  had  far  greater  musical  facility  and  in- 
tensity than  the  former,  and  a more  concentrated  and  serious 
purpose  than  the  latter.  His  work  was  perfectly  adapted  to 
the  conditions  of  his  time,  so  that  it  forthwith  started  an 
operatic  current  which  diverged  sharply  from  that  of  the 
prevalent  Italian  school  and  soon  engaged  many  other  power- 
ful geniuses,  of  whom  Wagner  became  at  length  chief.  Weber’s 
gifts  were  essentially  romantic  in  quality,  especially  as  re- 
gards the  exaltation  of  imaginative  warmth  and  passion  over 
statuesque  regularity  and  elegance.  His  melodic  and  structural 
invention  was  remarkable  and  his  command  of  effect,  both  vocal 
and  instrumental,  full  of  originality.  In  particular,  he  was  a 
fascinating  colorist  in  orchestration. 

Weber  also  rendered  real  service  in  raising  the  status  of 
musicianship  in  the  eyes  of  society.  His  titled  descent  and  his 
cultured  manners  gave  him  the  entree  into  exclusive  circles  and 
his  essential  worth  inspired  respect  for  his  art. 

424 


WEBER 


425 


Carl  Maria  von  Weber  (d.  1826)  belonged  to  an  extensive  family  in  which 
musical  ability  was  frequent.  His  father  and  the  father  of  Mozart's  wife  were 
brothers,  so  that  he  and  Mozart  were  cousins  by  marriage,  though  the  latter 
died  while  Weber  was  but  a child.  His 
father  (d.  1812)  was  something  of  a sol- 
dier, a respectable  viola  and  double-bass- 
player,  and  able  to  turn  his  hand  to  other 
things.  Twice  married,  he  had  many 
children,  the  most  musical  of  whom  were 
Fritz  and  Edmund  in  the  first  set,  both 
pupils  of  Haydn,  and  Carl,  the  eldest  of 
the  second  set.  The  latter  was  born  in 
I786at  Eutin  (near  Liibeck),  where  since 
1779  the  father  had  been  choirmaster  or 
band-leader. 

The  elder  Weber  was  versatile  and 
restless.  His  second  wife  was  a good 
stage-soprano  and  all  the  children  had 
talent.  So  the  family  moved  from  place 
to  place,  giving  concerts  and  plays  in  a 
half-gipsy  fashion.  During  his  first  25 
years  the  young  Carl  was  never  in  one 
place  more  than  three  years,  often  only  a few  months.  The  range  of  his 
travels  was  from  Liibeck  and  Hamburg  on  the  north  to  Munich  and  Salzburg 
on  the  south,  and  from  Breslau  on  the  east  to  Stuttgart  and  Mannheim  on 
the  west.  Thus  he  saw  a deal  of  the  world,  especially  on  the  theatric  side. 

His  first  good  teaching  in  music  was  in  1796  from  J.  P.  Heuschkel(d.  1853), 
court-oboist  and  organist  at  Hildburghausen,  who  gave  him  sound  training  in 
piano-playing.  In  1798  at  Salzburg  he  had  careful  lessons  in  composition 
from  Michael  Haydn.  In  1799  these  were  continued  at  Munich  under  J.  N. 
Kalcher  (d.  1826),  the  court-organist.  Here  he  began  concert-playing  and 
wrote  several  extended  works  (later  burnt).  Here,  too,  he  and  his  father  be- 
came absorbed  over  the  new  process  of  lithography,  and  the  family  moved  to 
Freiberg  (Saxony),  intending  to  adopt  it  as  a business.  But,  encountering  a 
good  dramatic  company,  Weber  undertook  his  first  real  opera,  Das  Waldmad- 
chen  (1800),  which  later  had  some  success  at  Vienna  and  Prague.  In  1801-2 
at  Salzburg  he  wrote  Peter  Schnioll  (1803  ? Augsburg).  From  1802  he  began 
independent  studies,  which  in  1803  were  stimulated  by  close  relations  at  Vienna 
with  Vogler.  Here,  too,  he  met  Haydn  and  Beethoven  and  was  intimate  with 
Hummel  and  other  players. 

On  Vogler’s  nomination  in  1804,  Weber  became  conductor  at  the  theatre  at 
Breslau.  Here  was  disclosed  his  latent  ability  as  leader  and  manager.  Among 
his  admirers  were  Berner  and  Klingohr,  from  whom  he  derived  much  on  the 
pianistic  side.  In  1806,  accidentally  swallowing  some  acid,  he  ruined  his  voice, 
at  least  for  singing.  In  this  year  he  left  his  post,  friction  having  developed, 
especially  with  the  previous  concertmaster,  Schnabel.  After  an  interval  at  a 
Silesian  castle  and  some  concert-giving,  in  1807  he  became  secretary  to  Duke 
Ludwig  of  Wiirttemberg  at  Stuttgart  — a place  of  moral  risk,  as  the  Duke  was 


426 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


a spendthrift  and  the  court  life  corrupt.  Weber  fell  into  dissipation  and  pe- 
cuniary difficulties,  but  also  did  considerable  serious  reading,  especially  of 
philosophy,  and  was  led  by  Danzi,  the  theatric  choirmaster,  to  write  the  opera 
Silvana  (1808-10)  and  some  other  works.  In  1810  he  incurred  the  king's  dis- 
favor, was  arrested  for  an  alleged  sale  of  preferments  and,  though  cleared  of 
guilt,  was  banished.  He  went  to  Mannheim,  where  Ritter  and  Gottfried 
Weber  welcomed  him,  and  thence  to  Darmstadt  to  visit  Vogler,  who  set  him 
at  the  quixotic  task  of  revising  some  of  Bach’s  chorales.  His  mind  was  begin- 
ning to  teem  with  ideas,  literary  as  well  as  musical,  and,  with  G.  Weber, 
Meyerbeer  and  others,  he  formed  a circle  for  the  advancement  of  musical 
criticism.  In  1810  Silvana  was  given  at  Frankfort,  Caroline  Brandt,  his 
future  wife,  in  the  title-role.  Soon  after,  he  completed  Abu  Hassan  (1811). 
These  two  years  brought  much  self-examination,  resulting  in  a giving  up  of 
wild  habits  and  a new  artistic  consecration. 

The  years  1811-12  were  occupied  by  short  sojourns  in  Munich,  Prague, 
Leipsic,  Gotha,  Weimar,  Berlin,  etc.  His  list  of  compositions  for  piano  and 
for  orchestra  steadily  increased,  his  playing  and  conducting  aroused  enthusiasm, 
and  his  original  and  fascinating  personality  attracted  hosts  of  friends.  In  1813 
he  accepted  the  directorship  of  the  Prague  theatre,  where  the  idea  of  genuine 
German  opera  had  long  been  accepted,  though  feebly  illustrated.  Weber’s 
zeal  and  skill  in  the  oversight  of  details  soon  produced  performances  of  unex- 
ampled excellence.  In  1814  he  made  a brilliant  visit  to  Berlin,  where  his 
facility,  especially  in  writing  patriotic  music,  fell  in  happily  with  the  jubilations 
over  Napoleon’s  downfall.  As  it  became  evident  that  Prague  did  not  offer  a 
field  for  the  full  realization  of  his  ideals,  in  1816  he  resigned. 

Soon  he  was  called  to  the  similar  post  at  Dresden  which  he  held  for  ten 
years.  Here  for  the  first  time  German  opera  was  given  the  same  official  honor 
as  Italian  — a fact  that  roused  some  hostility.  But  Weber  set  himself  to 
creating  interest  by  explanatory  newspaper-articles,  by  a careful  selection  of 
works  (not  confined  to  those  in  German),  by  unheard-of  pains  in  rehearsal, 
and  by  steady  improvements  in  soloists,  chorus  and  orchestra,  all  tending 
toward  extreme  perfection  in  the  total  effect.  He  gradually  became  the  sole 
active  court-musician,  Morlacchi  being  much  in  Italy.  In  1817,  using  a 
libretto  by  Kind,  he  began  Der  Freischiitz  (completed  1820),  and,  though  he 
often  digressed  into  fine  piano  composition,  his  passion  for  dramatic  work 
attained  its  climax.  But  his  health  was  uncertain,  giving  signs  of  the  final 
breakdown.  In  1820  he  visited  Leipsic,  Halle,  Gottingen,  many  North  Ger- 
man cities  and  Copenhagen,  everywhere  greeted  with  amazing  enthusiasm. 
In  1821  at  Berlin  came  his  greatest  triumph,  the  production  of  Der  Frei- 
schiitz, which  was  the  turning-point  in  the  contest  between  the  German  and 
the  Italian  schools.  Similar  warmth  was  shown  later  at  other  capitals,  notably 
at  Vienna,  whither  Weber  was  urged  to  remove.  For  Vienna  he  soon  set  to 
work  upon  Euryanthe , whose  first  productions  in  1823,  however,  were  not 
well  received.  This  disappointment  and  the  precariousness  of  his  health  led 
to  much  depression,  from  which  he  was  roused  by  an  opportune  commission 
from  England.  Though  sinking  into  consumption,  he  began  Oberon  early  in 
1825,  and  in  1826,  by  way  of  Paris,  crossed  to  England  and  conducted  the  first 
performances  at  London.  Unable  to  return,  he  died  there. 


WEBER 


427 


Weber’s  personality  had  a singular  charm.  He  had  social  polish  and 
versatility,  a fund  of  humor  and  gayety,  and  a magnetic  instinct.  The  very 
irregularity  of  his  early  life  gave  him  social  and  mental  experience,  including 
mastery  of  dramatic  technique  and  knowledge  of  the  spirit  of  the  German 
people.  Intellectually  he  was  alert  in  several  fields,  with  a bent  toward  liter- 
ary production.  He  dabbled  in  novel-writing,  besides  planning  various  works 
about  music,  such  as  a dictionary,  a history,  a periodical  and  some  critical 
essays.  He  was  sensitive  to  the  rising  spirit  of  Teutonic  nationalism,  which 
he  fed  by  stirring  patriotic  songs.  He  was  the  first  musical  spokesman  for 
the  fanciful  and  romantic  strain  in  German  imagination  — the  taste  for  the 
magical  and  miraculous,  for  gnomes,  fairies  and  goblins. 

Though  undoubtedly  reckless  in  his  youth,  his  later  years  were  full  of 
earnestness,  and  he  won  the  respect  of  a wide  circle.  His  one  important 
pupil  was  Benedict  (d.  1885),  later  active  in  England. 

Weber’s  works  include  (a)  7 operas  (1800-26),  with  sketches  for  two 
others,  incidental  numbers  for  several  more  and  many  detached  dramatic 
pieces,  besides  several  cantatas  (notably  Kampf  und  Sieg , 1815);  (£)  4 

piano-sonatas  (1812-22),  8 sets  of  variations,  many  polonaises,  rondos  and 
dances,  with  lesser  pieces  for  four  hands;  (c)  2 piano-concertos  (1810-12), 
the  famous  Concertstuck  (1821),  violin-sonatas,  concertos  for  clarinet, 
bassoon  and  horn,  and  several  other  concerted  works ; (d)  2 symphonies 

(1806-7),  3 detached  overtures  (besides  about  10  with  dramas),  and  a few 
other  orchestral  works;  ( e ) over  100  songs  of  various  degree  and  about  20 
noted  part-songs  for  male  voices;  (/)  2 masses  (1818-19). 

172.  The  Romantic  Opera.  — The  word  ‘ romantic  ’ has  differ- 
ent shades  of  meaning  according  to  the  connection  in  which  it 
is  used,  and,  to  some  extent,  according  to  the  prepossessions  of 
the  one  using  it.  As  applied  to  literature  and  kindred  fine  arts 
the  term  implies  that  the  subject  chosen  is  unusual  and  fanci- 
ful, that  the  treatment  is  unconventional  and  exciting,  and  that 
the  total  spirit  is  freely  expressive  of  the  artist’s  personality  and 
mood.  In  all  these  regards  ‘ romantic  ’ stands  opposed  to  ‘ aca- 
demic ’ or  ‘ classical.’  Minds  differ  in  their  predisposition  toward 
one  or  the  other,  and  in  certain  periods  one  or  the  other  pre- 
dominates as  a norm.  The  opening  decades  of  the  19th  century 
were  strongly  marked  by  extensive  movements  that  are  gener- 
ally recognized  as  romantic.  These  were  nowhere  stronger 
than  in  Germany. 

The  rise  of  the  German  romantic  opera  was  a symptom  of 
the  age.  It  had  clear  relations  with  the  trend  of  German 
poetry,  fiction  and  criticism.  Its  literary  type  was  the  romance 
or  the  fairy-tale.  The  materials  of  this  type  were  explicitly 
fanciful,  often  impossibly  extraordinary.  The  indispensable  ele- 


428 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


ment  of  picturesqueness  was  secured  by  employing  sources  like 
oriental  tales,  the  many  mediaeval  legends  and  myths,  or  the 
treasury  of  Teutonic  folk-lore  about  the  peopling  of  all  nature 
with  mystic  beings,  good  and  evil.  But  these  materials  were 
handled  realistically  as  facts,  not  fictions,  with  a sincerity  and 
earnestness  that  shows  some  sense  of  their  symbolic  quality. 
There  was  apt  to  be  much  that  was  fantastic  and  uncanny, 
certainly  some  air  of  mystery  and  wonder.  But  much  was  also 
made  of  the  imaginative  treatment  of  physical  scenery  and 
phenomena,  and  of  homely,  naive  human  life  — in  each  case 
seizing  upon  aspects  that  pique  the  fancy  and  stir  the  heart. 
The  musical  drama  at  once  caught  the  new  literary  note,  react- 
ing with  relief  from  the  hollow  ideas,  worn-out  sentiment  and 
affected  conventionality  of  the  usual  Italian  opera.  As  against 
the  latter,  the  new  German  opera  came  like  a refreshing  breeze 
from  the  open  country,  and  a voice  from  a hearty  and  uncon- 
taminated society.  Of  this  musical  movement  Weber  was  not 
the  founder.  It  was  ‘in  the  air’  before  his  day.  Indeed,  the 
revival  of  the  singspiel  and  the  new  recognition  of  the  song 
are  plain  evidences  of  its  existence.  Weber’s  distinction 
lay  in  his  eminent  success  in  bringing  the  tendency  to  full- 
rounded  artistic  expression. 

Without  implying  that  the  romantic  opera  had  a fixed  or  regular 
method  (which  was  precisely  what  it  avoided),  it  is  possible  to  make 
some  statements  about  its  usual  features,  which  grew  out  of  its  untram- 
meled dramatic  nature. 

The  strict  recitative  was  rare,  its  place  being  taken,  where  necessary,  by 
spoken  dialogue  ; but  declamatory  passages  might  occur  anywhere.  The 
formal  aria,  though  its  outlines  remain,  was  so  disguised  as  to  seem  a free 
lyric  or  dramatic  utterance,  passing  over  constantly  into  the  scena.  The 
simple  folk-song  type  of  melody  became  more  frequent  — folk-like  airs, 
not  actual  popular  songs  (as  in  the  ballad-opera).  Concerted  passages, 
for  soloists  or  chorus,  abounded,  not  as  set  numbers  by  themselves,  but  as 
natural  incidents  in  the  action.  In  all  these  regards  we  see  the  desertion 
of  the  notion  that  the  opera  is  a concert-form,  made  up  of  items  devised 
for  the  behoof  of  star  singers.  The  dramatic  plan  and  ensemble  are  now 
supreme. 

But  the  freshness  of  the  type  was  nowhere  more  evident  than  in  the 
handling  of  the  instrumentation.  The  new  resources  of  the  orchestra  were 
freely  drawn  upon  to  heighten  the  realism  and  impressiveness  of  the 
scenes,  to  set  forth  the  sequence  of  emotions,  to  supply  ‘atmosphere.’ 
To  this  end  the  overture  was  made  significant,  not  as  a detached  set  of 
movements  in  conventional  form,  but  as  a real  prelude  to  the  action, 


THE  ROMANTIC  OPERA 


429 


generally  emphasizing  some  of  its  characteristic  ‘motives.’  Purely 
orchestral  numbers  in  the  course  of  the  play  became  rare,  simply  because 
not  dramatically  germane,  but,  instead,  the  functions  of  the  ‘ accom- 
paniment ’ were  freely  expanded,  bringing  it  into  full  coordination  with 
the  vocal  elements. 

In  all  these  regards  we  see  the  working  of  the  same  ideas  for  which 
Gluck  contended  and  which  Mozart  exemplified,  but  the  application  was 
now  in  the  hands  of  leaders  more  enterprising  than  either,  working  with 
technical  methods  more  elaborate  and  unfettered  than  had  been  possible 
a generation  earlier.  At  every  point  we  note  the  beginnings  of  the  mon- 
umental type  of  musical  drama  later  to  be  illustrated  by  Wagner  and  his 
contemporaries. 

As  a help  to  appreciating  the  extensive  drift  toward  the  romantic  opera, 
a number  of  writers  should  be  named  who  were  popular  for  the  time,  though 
several  of  them  dropped  out  of  sight  later. 

Joseph  Weigl  (d.  1846),  a pupil  of  Albrechtsberger  and  Salieri,  was  from 
before  1800  theatre-choirmaster  at  Vienna  and  from  1825  Salieri’s  successor. 
He  was  a favorite  of  Maria  Theresa,  an  agreeable  man  and  a smooth  melodist. 
Of  his  about  30  operas  (from  1782,  ’89)  some  were  in  Italian.  La  Principessa 
d1  Amalfi  was  praised  by  Haydn.  Others  were  Gli  amori  maritiari  or  Der 
Corsair  (1797),  Die  Uniform  (1798),  Das  Waisetihaus,  Die  Schweizer- 
Familie , his  strongest  work  (1809),  Die  Jugend  Peters  des  Grossen  (1815), 
Der  Bergstiirz,  Nachtigall  tmd  Rabe  (1818),  etc.  He  also  wrote  a Passion 
(1804),  an  Easter  oratorio,  and,  in  later  life,  church  music. 

Friedrich  Heinrich  Himmel  (d.  1814),  the  pianist,  studied  in  Italy,  in  1795 
succeeded  Reichardt  as  choirmaster  at  Berlin  and  traveled  widely  as  player 
and  composer.  Besides  Italian  operas,  like  Se?niramide  (1795,  Naples), 
Alessandro  (1798,  St.  Petersburg),  Vasco  da  Gama  (1801,  Berlin),  he  was 
prompt  to  seize  the  new  opening  for  German  romances,  as  in  Fanchon  (1804), 
Die  Sylphen  (1806),  and  Der  Kobold  (1811).  In  spite  of  his  dissipated 
habits,  he  was  popular  as  a player  and  especially  as  a song- writer. 

Ignaz  von  Seyfried  (d.  1841),  trained  by  Mozart,  Haydn,  Albrechtsberger 
and  especially  Winter,  from  1797  was  theatre-choirmaster  at  Vienna,  produc- 
ing over  100  stage-works  of  unoriginal  but  pleasing  quality,  and  considerable 
church  music.  Among  his  operas  may  be  named  Der  Wundermann  am 
Rheinfall  (1799),  Die  Druiden  (1801),  Feodora  (1812),  Ugolino  (1821),  etc. 
After  1828  he  devoted  himself  to  literary  work. 

At  about  this  point  in  the  series  Weber  entered  the  field  with  Das  IVald- 
madchen  (1800),  followed  at  intervals  by  other  operas,  of  which  Silvana 
(1810),  Der  Freischiitz  (1821),  Euryanthe  (1823)  and  Oberon  (1826,  Lon- 
don) are  historically  the  chief.  Of  these,  Euryanthe  was  the  only  one  in 
which  there  is  not  some  spoken  dialogue. 

Konradin  Kreutzer  (d.  1849),  a good  pianist  and  clarinettist,  about  1804 
came  to  Vienna,  studied  with  Albrechtsberger,  in  1812  went  to  Stuttgart  and 
thence  to  Donaueschingen,  returned  in  1822  to  Vienna,  working  at  two  dif- 
ferent theatres,  and  in  1840-6  was  at  Cologne.  He  was  a gifted  composer 
and  enjoyed  great  popularity.  Besides  his  30  operas  (from  1800),  he  wrote 


430 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


well  for  the  piano  and  for  chamber  combinations,  and  also  excellent  songs 
and  male  part-songs.  Among  his  dramatic  works  were  Jery  und  Bately 
(1810),  Conradin  von  Schwabeti  (1812),  Cordelia  (1819),  Libussa  (1822), 
Der  Taucher  (1824),  Der  Verschwetider  (1833)  and  Das  Nachtlager  von 
Granada  (1834),  of  which  the  last  two  are  still  given. 

Ernst  Theodor  Hoffmann  (d.  1822)  pursued  law,  music  and  literature  more 
or  less  together,  the  emphasis  being  upon  music  between  1805  and  1816. 
From  1808  he  was  theatre-director  at  Bamberg,  from  1810  over  the  signature 
‘Kreisler’  wrote  witty  essays  for  a Leipsic  journal  (collected,  1814),  and  in 
1813-4  conducted  opera  at  Leipsic  and  Dresden.  He  was  brilliantly  versa- 
tile. Besides  other  undertakings,  he  wrote  about  10  stage-works  (from  1801), 
such  as  Scharpe  und  Blume  (1805,  libretto  also),  Der  Trank  der  Unsterb- 
lichkeit  (1808),  Aurora  (1 8 1 1)  and  his  masterpiece  Undine  (1816).  He 
admired  Mozart  so  ardently  that  he  adopted  the  name  Amadeus.  Beethoven 
and  Weber  were  interested  in  him,  and  his  affinity  with  the  poet  Richter 
(‘Jean  Paul’)  commended  him  strongly  to  Schumann.  After  1816  he  was  in 
the  Prussian  civil  service. 

Adalbert  Gyrowetz  (d.  1850)  wrote  extraordinarily  much  and  mostly  very 
well,  and  yet  to-day  is  almost  forgotten.  His  active  career  extended  from 
the  lifetime  of  Mozart  to  the  period  of  Mendelssohn.  Born  in  Bohemia  and 
educated  at  Prague,  he  came  in  1786  to  Vienna,  finding  cordial  welcome  from 
Mozart  and  his  circle  for  his  early  symphonies.  Under  a liberal  patron  he 
spent  two  years  in  Italy,  appearing  as  a violin-virtuoso,  writing  in  1787  his 
first  quartets,  and  studying  with  Sala  at  Naples.  In  1789  he  visited  Paris 
(where  symphonies  of  his  had  been  given  as  Haydn’s)  and  settled  in  London, 
receiving  much  applause  as  an  orchestral  writer.  In  1797  ill-health  caused 
his  return  to  Vienna,  where  his  legal  and  linguistic  accomplishments  got  him  - 
work  as  a diplomatic  attache.  In  1804  he  was  given  a post  at  the  opera  under 
Weigl,  continuing  till  1831.  His  later  years  were  made  bitter  by  poverty. 
His  facility  was  enormous  in  every  field  — 60  symphonies,  about  80  chamber 
works,  40  piano-sonatas,  19  masses,  and  numerous  lesser  pieces,  vocal  and 
instrumental,  besides  some  70  stage-works.  Of  the  latter,  the  first  was 
Semiratnis  (1792,  London,  the  score  lost  by  fire  before  performance),  and 
the  very  successful  Agnes  Sorel  (1806),  Der  Augenarzt  (1811),  Die  Priifung 
(1813),  Helene  (1816)  and  Felix  und  Adele  (1831).  Beethoven  highly  com- 
mended Robert  (1813),  and  Der  Augenarzt  held  its  popularity  for  years. 
His  autobiography  (1848)  has  some  importance. 

Although  Beethoven’s  Fidelio  (1805)  can  hardly  be  counted  as  a typical 
romantic  opera,  its  spirit  and  style  are  not  only  thoroughly  German,  but  clearly 
related  to  more  fanciful  works.  Its  moral  elevation  reflects  the  character  of 
the  composer’s  personality,  and  its  dramatic  intensity  illustrates  the  German 
recoil  from  Italian  frivolity. 

Ludwig  Spohr  (d.  1859),  best  known  as  violinist  and  instrumental  com- 
poser (see  sec.  181),  while  concertmaster  at  Gotha  became  deeply  interested 
in  dramatic  work  (from  1806).  In  all,  he  wrote  10  operas,  of  which  the  finest 
were  Faust  (1818),  Ze?nire  iind  Azor  (1819),  Jessonda  (1823),  which  he  con- 
sidered his  masterpiece,  Der  Berggeist  (1825)  and  Der  Alchy mist  (1830).  He 
had  obvious  limitations  and  mannerisms,  but  also  refinement,  imaginative 


THE  ROMANTIC  OPERA 


431 


penetration  and  abundant  technical  equipment.  His  handling  of  the  overture 
and  of  accompaniments  is  masterly,  and  many  scenes  and  passages  are  original, 
beautiful  and  impressive.  He  and  Marschner  were,  next  to  Weber,  the 
strongest  exponents  of  the  new  operatic  ideal,  though  he  did  not  have  their 
fervor  or  freedom.  His  peculiar  critical  attitude  prevented  his  full  sympathy 
with  either  Beethoven  or  Weber,  while  at  the  same  time  he  was  powerfully 
contributing  to  the  advance  of  the  new  German  school. 

Here  may  be  mentioned  a series  of  ready  and  popular  composers  of  no  per- 
manent influence,  namely,  Johann  Nepomuk  Poissl  (d.  1865),  a lifelong  court- 
musician  at  Munich,  with  some  15  operas  (from  1806),  of  which  the  strongest 
was  Der  Untersberg  (1829)  ; Karl  Ludwig  Blum  (d.  1844),  an  actor  and 
many-sided  musician,  from  1822  stage-manager  of  the  opera  at  Berlin,  with 
50  operettas  (from  before  1810)  and  adaptations  of  the  French  vaudeville, 
Das  Rosenhutchen  (1815)  being  specially  successful ; Franz  Volkert  (d.  1845), 
director  of  one  of  the  Vienna  theatres,  with  about  150  taking  stage-works 
(1810-30);  Peter  Joseph  von  Lindpaintner  (d.  1856),  pupil  of  Winter  at 
Munich,  from  1812  conductor  there  and  from  1819  at  Stuttgart,  winning  fame 
by  his  skill,  with  over  20  operas  (from  1811),  notably  Der  Vamfiyr  (1829)  and 
Lichtenstein  (1845),  besides  instrumental  music  and  songs ; and  Friedrich 
Kuhlau  (d.  1832),  the  able  flutist,  from  1810  at  Copenhagen,  with  a few  care- 
ful operas  there  (from  1814).  (For  Schubert,  see  sec.  174.) 

Heinrich  Marschner  (d.  1861),  born  in  1795  at  Zittau,  represents  a later 
group  than  most  of  the  foregoing.  Musically  precocious,  he  had  good  teach- 
ing at  Leipsic,  in  1816  began  opera-writing  at  Pressburg,  in  1817  visited 
Vienna,  meeting  Beethoven,  attracted  the  notice  of  Weber,  with  whom  from 
1822  he  was  associated  at  Dresden,  from  1826  was  opera-director  at  Leipsic 
and  from  1831  at  Hanover,  with  a wide  renown.  Besides  incidental  stage- 
music  to  many  plays,  he  produced  about  1 5 operas,  of  which  Der  Vampyr 
(1828),  Der  Tempter  und  die  Judin  (1829,  plot  from  ‘Ivanhoe’)  and  Hans 
Heiling  (1833)  placed  him  among  the  strongest  of  the  early  German  opera- 
writers.  He  also  wrote  excellent  piano  and  chamber  music,  and  remarkable 
songs  and  part-songs.  His  genius  resembled  Weber’s,  with  a striking  power 
in  depicting  weird  and  outlandish  scenes  as  well  as  those  of  homely  simplicity. 
His  command  of  harmonic  and  orchestral  resources  was  superb,  his  melodic 
inspiration  abundant,  and  his  dramatic  sense  sure  and  vigorous. 

Karl  Gottlieb  Reissiger  (d.  1859),  a fellow-student  with  Marschner  at 
Leipsic,  in  1821  began  opera-writing  at  Vienna,  studied  with  Winter  at 
Munich,  in  1824  was  sent  by  the  Prussian  government  to  Italy  to  report  upon 
conservatory  methods,  taught  at  Berlin  for  a time,  in  1826  organized  the 
Hague  conservatory,  and  succeeded  Marschner  and  Weber  at  Dresden.  His 
operas  numbered  about  10,  the  most  popular  being  the  melodrama  Yelva 
(1827),  Die  Felsenmuhle  von  Etalieres  (1829)  and  Turandot  (1835).  He  was 
an  industrious  composer  of  chamber  music,  and  of  pleasing  piano-pieces  and 
songs.  He  also  wrote  much  church  music,  including  10  masses  with  orchestra 
and  the  oratorio  David. 

Xaver  Schnyder  von  Wartensee  (d.  1868),  the  Frankfort  teacher  and  song- 
writer, wrote  one  fairy  opera,  Fortunat  (1829). 


432 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


173.  Schubert’s  Brief  Career.  — In  one  sense  there  is  no  more 
pathetic  story  in  musical  annals  than  that  of  Schubert.  He  lived 
less  than  thirty-two  years,  cut  off  before  the  world  had  seen  but 
a mere  glimmer  of  his  genius.  His  lot  was  full  of  material  mis- 
fortune and  social  isolation,  largely  due  to  his  peculiar  make-up, 
but  none  the  less  sad.  Though  working  for  fifteen  years  in 
Vienna,  then  the  musical  capital  of  the  world,  his  professional 
opportunities  were  pitifully  meagre  and  the  recognition  of  his 
worth  confined  to  an  obscure  circle  of  admirers.  Yet  from  his 
sixteenth  year  he  poured  forth  a stream  of  works,  over  eleven 
hundred  in  all,  such  as  no  other  composer  has  equaled.  Among 
these  were  hundreds  of  songs  that  mark  him  as  a prince  in 
this  beautiful  branch  of  art,  but  among  them,  too,  were  remark- 
able instrumental  and  dramatic  works  that  bring  him  into  relation 
with  Beethoven  on  the  one  hand  and  with  Weber  on  the  other.  In 
positive  inspiration  he  was  fully  as  wonderful  as  Mozart,  though 
his  technical  learning  was  much  less.  In  spirit  and  poetic 
sensibility  he  was  a shining  exponent  of  the  new  romanticism, 
though  his  favorite  idiom  of  expression  was  instinctively  regular 
and  classical.  In  the  influence  that  he  finally  exerted  he  stands 
with  the  great  masters  just  named  as  a powerful  factor  in  bring- 
ing German  music  to  the  full  consciousness  of  its  mission.  He 
therefore  exemplified  movements  in  musical  art  that  were  already 
plainly  visible,  but  the  drift  and  final  goal  of  which  were  not  yet 
seen,  least  of  all  by  so  unconscious  an  artist  as  Schubert  himself. 

Franz  Schubert  (d.  1828)  was  born  in  179 7,  the  third  surviving  son  of  a 
schoolmaster  at  Lichtenthal,  a suburb  of  Vienna.  His  surroundings  were 
plain  and  poor,  but  his  father  (d.  1830)  and  his  elder  brothers,  Ignaz  (d. 
1844)  and  Ferdinand  (d.  1859),  were  eager  for  music,  which  was  the  house- 
hold’s one  luxury.  Besides  instruction  from  them,  he  had  lessons  from 
Holzer,  the  parish  choirmaster,  at  1 1 sang  in  the  choir  and,  having  a lovely 
voice,  was  soon  transferred  to  the  Imperial  Chapel  and  choir-school,  where  he 
remained  till  1813,  having  some  fair  instruction  and  many  physical  hardships. 
His  chief  delights  came  from  the  work  of  the  school  orchestra,  of  which  he 
was  first  violin  and  deputy  conductor,  from  rare  chances  to  hear  impor- 
tant operas,  and  from  frequent  quartet  practice  at  home,  finally  enlarged 
to  small  symphony  performances.  His  objects  of  admiration  were  Mozart 
and  Beethoven.  His  evident  genius  might  have  secured  him  a grant  from  the 
Emperor  for  further  study  if  he  had  made  more  effort  in  non-musical  branches. 
When  his  voice  broke  (1813),  to  avoid  military  service  he  taught  primary 
scholars  in  his  father’s  school,  mixing  with  the  daily  drudgery  as  much  music 
as  he  could  and  beginning  habits  of  constant  composition. 


SCHUBERT 


433 


In  1816,  failing  to  obtain  appointment  as  head  of  a new  music-school  at 
Laibach,  for  a few  months  he  shared  the  lodgings  of  Von  Schober,  a well-to- 
do  university-student,  and  gradually  came  into  contact  with  other  compan- 
ions and  well-wishers,  some  of  whom 
might  have  become  powerful  patrons 
had  he  been  less  shy  and  less  inclined 
to  Bohemian  ways.  In  1816  he  won 
the  notice  of  J.  M.  Vogl  (d.  1840),  an 
eminent  baritone,  who  became  his  firm 
friend  and  advocate.  In  the  summer 
of  1818  he  taught  at  the  Hungarian 
country-place  of  Count  Johann  Ester- 
hazy.  From  1819  for  two  years  he 
lived  in  poor  lodgings  with  the  sombre 
poet  Mayrhofer,  varied  with  a summer 
trip  or  two  with  Vogl  or  Von  Scho- 
ber. From  1820  he  began  to  have 
dramatic  commissions,  but  with  little 
public  success,  and  to  make  more 
friends  through  the  efforts  of  the  Sonn- 
leithner  family,  as  well  as  to  see  some 
songs  actually  published.  In  1822  he 
met  Weber  and  Beethoven  for  the  first  time,  though  without  important 
result,  owing  to  his  timidity  and  inexperience.  He  was  offered  the  post 
of  court-organist,  but  declined  it,  probably  because  of  his  distaste  for 
regularity.  In  1824  he  taught  again  at  the  Esterhazy  home,  and  fell  in  love 
with  the  second  daughter  — quite  hopelessly,  of  course.  In  1825,  after  a 
happy  season  of  creation  at  Vienna,  he  and  Vogl  had  a fine  trip  to  the  Tyrol. 
These  trips  did  much  to  counteract  the  strain  of  the  winters,  with  their 
incessant  production,  excitement  and  reckless  joviality  — habits  which 
again  and  again  brought  on  severe  illnesses.  In  1826  he  sought  without 
success  to  be  made  second  choirmaster  at  the  court,  as  well  as  to  serve  as  con- 
ductor at  the  court  theatre.  In  1827  Beethoven,  during  his  last  illness,  was 
astonished  to  learn  something  of  Schubert’s  works,  which  he  had  not  appre- 
ciated, and  the  latter  saw  him  twice  and  was  one  of  the  mourners  at  his 
funeral.  In  the  summer  he  had  a fine  trip  to  Gratz.  In  the  spring  of  1828 
occurred  the  only  public  concert  of  his  works,  which  brought  him  applause 
and  some  money  — the  latter  soon  gone.  His  health  now  gave  way.  He 
became  depressed  and  was  subject  to  recurrent  mental  delusions.  Late  in 
1828  he  died  of  exhaustion.  He  was  buried  close  to  Beethoven,  according  to 
his  urgent  desire,  executed  with  unselfish  fidelity  by  his  father  and  brother. 
Among  his  meagre  effects,  estimated  at  perhaps  $15,  was  “a  pile  of  old 
music,  valued  at  10  florins”  (about  $1.50),  which  doubtless  contained  many 
scores  through  which  later  his  fame  was  to  be  established. 

In  personal  appearance  he  was  short,  thick-set  and  round-shouldered — in 
no  sense  distinguished.  His  face  was  round  and  chubby,  his  complexion 
pasty  (owing  to  poor  food),  his  hair  thick  and  black,  his  eyes  keen  and  alert, 
but  excessively  near-sighted.  In  manners  he  was  as  shy  and  awkward  as  a 


434 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


child,  especially  when  out  of  the  rough  student-circle  whose  ways  he  loved.  He 
drew  back  from  high  society,  though  his  simplicity,  gentleness  and  sincerity 
attracted  cultivated  friends.  His  temperament  was  sunny  and  contented,  even 
amid  want  and  obscurity,  though  occasionally,  especially  toward  the  end,  he 
had  periods  of  depression. 

For  almost  15  years  his  daily  habit  was  to  compose  steadily  in  the  morn- 
ings, and  to  spend  the  afternoons  with  friends  or  in  the  suburbs,  and  the 
evenings  in  careless  camaraderie.  He  usually  lived  in  miserable  quarters, 
shunning  all  stated  duties.  He  had  an  omnivorous  craving  for  poetry,  chiefly 
because  it  roused  instant  musical  inspiration.  His  song-texts  were  drawn 
from  over  100  different  poets,  including  over  70  from  Goethe,  nearly  50  from 
Schiller,  over  40  from  Muller,  etc.  He  was  fascinated  over  the  opera,  but  was 
uncritical  about  his  librettos,  most  of  them  being  trashy  and  extravagant.  The 
interest  in  orchestral  writing  steadily  grew  upon  him,  and  his  freedom  in  it 
kept  pace.  Composition  was  his  one  object  in  life.  His  method  of  work 
was  almost  incredibly  rapid  and  sure,  being  often  guided  by  a sort  of  rapttis. 
Even  extended  works  presented  themselves  to  him  in  final  form  at  once,  so 
that  writing  out  was  only  incidental.  He  made  no  preliminary  sketches  and 
hated  revisions.  In  all  these  regards  he  was  the  opposite  of  Beethoven. 

His  continued  poverty  was  due  partly  to  the  lack  of  stated  employment, 
partly  to  the  small  prices  derived  from  his  works,  and  partly  to  his  imprudence 
or  sheer  generosity.  He  was  wanting  in  business  tact,  finesse  and  wisdom, 
and  was  utterly  unconscious  of  the  real  worth  of  his  works.  He  made  them 
for  the  pleasure  of  making  them.  His  public  success  was  hindered  by  un- 
sympathetic managers  and  publishers,  and  by  hostile  press  criticism. 

His  moral  instincts  were  direct  and  strong,  but  he  seems  not  to  have  had 
any  special  religious  sentiments,  though  nominally  a Catholic.  Within  his 
home  circle  his  affections  had  always  a childlike  intensity. 

174.  His  Works  and  Style.  — Schubert’s  entire  artistic  manner 
was  dominated  by  the  song  idea.  Pellucid  melodies  in  perfect 
form  welled  up  within  him  in  endless  abundance.  Primarily 
these  were  conceived  for  vocal  delivery,  but  works  for  solo  instru- 
ments, the  piano  or  ensemble  groups  were  similarly  treated.  Yet 
his  extraordinary  fertility  of  expression  was  not  only  melodic, 
but  harmonic  and  coloristic  as  well.  His  grasp  of  the  resources 
of  tonality  was  intuitive,  his  readiness  in  elaborating  characteristic 
accompaniments  astonishing,  and  his  sensitiveness  to  the  vary- 
ing timbre  of  both  voices  and  instruments  acute  and  original. 
His  special  weaknesses,  due  to  his  imperfect  early  discipline, 
were  in  contrapuntal  structure,  in  the  organic  development  of 
his  tone-materials,  and  in  compression  and  restraint  when  he 
sought  to  arrange  them  in  an  extended  plan.  Many  of  his 
works  are  amazingly  long  and  diffuse,  though  not  dry  or 
empty.  He  never  fails  of  ideas,  but  is  sometimes  feeble  in  un- 


SCHUBERT 


435 


folding  and  disposing  them  when  the  scale  of  presentation  is 
large.  His  zeal  for  operatic  effort  was  strong  during  the  middle 
of  his  career,  but  in  dramatic  technique  he  was  too  inexperienced 
to  be  often  successful. 

Schubert’s  melodic  inspiration  differed  from  that  of  Mozart, 
for  instance,  in  that  it  preferred  to  attach  itself  to  a definite 
thought  or  sentiment,  usually  literary  in  origin,  of  which  it  was 
the  musical  embodiment  and  to  which  it  absolutely  conformed. 
Even  in  his  instrumental  works,  there  seems  to  be  behind  the 
utterance  some  suggestion  or  impulse  that  is  not  simply  tonal. 
Hence  what  he  says  is  apparently  freighted  with  meaning  as 
well  as  clothed  in  outward  charm.  But  we  look  in  vain  for 
the  signs  of  personal  experience  in  the  composer  corresponding 
to  the  implications  of  his  works.  That  he  caught  instantly  and 
perfectly  by  his  imagination  all  sorts  of  suggestion  from  without 
is  evident,  but  that  he  actually  lived  what  he  wrote,  except 
through  imagination,  is  uncertain.  He  sought  to  depict  what 
the  eye  of  his  fancy  saw  rather  than  to  disclose  hidden  depths 
within  himself.  Yet,  against  this,  the  repose  of  his  usual  style 
corresponds  to  the  contentment  of  his  normal  mood,  while  in 
the  subtle  pathos  that  often  creeps  in  we  may  perhaps  see  the 
unconscious  reflection  of  his  unhappy  circumstances. 

A rough  summary  of  his  works  is  as  follows : — (a)  about  650  solo 
songs,  ranging  in  size  from  brief  snatches  and  ballads  up  to  protracted  odes 
and  scenas,  covering  an  indescribable  variety  of  topics  and  lines  of  feeling, 
and  including  many  sets  or  ‘cycles  1 of  pieces,  held  together  usually  by 
some  slight  dramatic  connection  ; (b)  perhaps  60  part-songs,  chiefly  for 

male  voices ; (c)  6 masses,  those  in  A1?  (1822)  and  E*7  (1828)  being  the 

largest,  2 sacred  cantatas,  notably  Miriams  Siegesgesang  (1828),  and 
several  motets  and  hymns,  some  of  the  latter  elaborate  ; ( d ) 18  dramatic 

works  (from  1814),  some  only  fragments,  but  including  the  operas  Alfonso 
und  Estrella  (1822),  and  Fierabras  (1823),  with  incidental  music  to 
Rosamunde  (1823),  of  which  only  parts  of  the  last  were  given  during  his 
lifetime ; ( e ) 24  piano-sonatas  (3  for  4 hands)  and  a vast  quantity  of 
lesser  pieces,  like  impromptus,  moments  musicals,  dances,  marches,  etc.  ; 
(/)  20  string-quartets,  besides  other  chamber  pieces  ; (g)  10  symphonies, 
some  incomplete,  of  which  the  most  famous  are  the  ‘Unfinished’  (1822) 
and  that  in  C (1828),  and  many  overtures,  the  finest  of  which  is  that  to 
Rosamunde.  Remarkably  fertile  years  were  1815,  with  almost  200  works, 
1816,  with  125,  and  1817,  with  70.  In  later  years  the  number  was  much 
smaller,  but  the  size  of  the  works  larger.  Many  works  recorded  appear 
to  be  lost,  many  have  only  recently  been  published,  and  many  are  not 
often  heard,  usually  on  account  of  their  length. 


436 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


As  Schubert  gradually  became  known,  his  success  with  the 
song  proved  a mighty  stimulus  to  other  composers,  though  the 
perfection  along  his  chosen  lines  made  the  opening  of  new 
styles  almost  imperative.  He  certainly  drew  the  bonds  between 
music  and  poetry  closer  than  they  had  ever  been  before.  Some 
of  his  piano  works  deserve  special  note  because  they  antedated 
many  of  the  same  general  character  that  have  been  more  influen- 
tial. They  were  among  the  earliest  examples  of  the  true  ‘ song 
without  words.’  His  accompaniments  and  much  of  his  dramatic 
and  symphonic  work  mark  him  as  one  of  the  first  masters  of  in- 
strumental effect.  His  kinship  with  Beethoven  is  obvious, 
amounting  often  to  direct  imitation,  as  well  as  with  Mozart, 
though  from  the  latter  he  differs  in  the  richness  and  poignancy 
of  his  emotional  content.  The  knowledge  of  his  works  in  detail 
was  so  long  delayed  that  their  historic  significance  was  obscured 
and,  even  now,  is  likely  to  be  underrated. 

The  ‘ discovery 1 of  Schubert  was  largely  due  to  the  researches  of 
Schumann  before  1840  and  the  cordial  interest  of  Mendelssohn  not  long 
afterward. 

Among  those  who  at  this  time  were  either  song-composers  of  note  or  use- 
ful in  furthering  the  cause  of  artistic  singing,  were  the  following : — 

Karl  Friedrich  Zelter  (d.  1832),  born  in  1758  at  Berlin  and  educated  in  the 
trade  of  a mason,  but  always  eager  for  music,  was  a pupil  of  Fasch  and  from 
1791  his  helper  in  the  Singakademie.  In  1800  he  succeeded  him  as  con- 
ductor. During  his  regime  the  society  began  regular  public  concerts  in  1801, 
dedicated  a building  of  its  own  in  1827,  and  reached  a membership  of  over 
400  singers.  Zelter  was  a passionate  admirer  of  Goethe  (correspondence, 
1833-4)  and  set  many  of  his  poems.  In  1809  he  started  the  first  ‘ Liedertafel,’ 
the  germ  of  the  great  4 Sangerbund,’  and  was  educationally  a leader.  He  was 
one  of  the  first  to  redirect  attention  to  Bach,  thus  awakening  Mendelssohn’s 
enthusiasm.  Besides  considerable  church  music,  he  wrote  many  songs  and 
almost  100  cantatas  and  part-songs  for  male  voices,  in  some  of  which  he  ap- 
proached the  rich  style  of  Schubert  and  Lowe.  To  his  circle  belonged  Luise 
Reichardt  (d.  1826),  the  gifted  daughter  of  J.  F.  Reichardt  (see  sec.  157),  who 
from  1814  was  a teacher  at  Hamburg,  with  beautiful  sacred  and  secular  songs 
(from  1800);  the  lawyer  Friedrich  Wollanck  (d.  1831),  whose  many  songs 
were  so  much  admired  by  Weber  that  he  urged  him  to  undertake  dramatic 
works  (from  1811)  ; Karl  Friedrich  Rungenhagen  (d.  1851),  who  assisted  Zel- 
ter from  1815  and  succeeded  him  in  1833  and  wrote  an  enormous  number  of 
agreeable  songs  and  part-songs,  besides  many  other  works.  (Concerning 
this  entire  group,  see  secs.  218-219.) 

Georg  Friedrich  Bischoff  (d.  1841),  choirmaster  at  Frankenhausen  (Thu- 
ringia), conceived  the  idea  of  organizing  large  music-festivals,  and  after  experi- 


SONG-COMPOSERS 


437 


ments  from  1804,  the  first  important  example  occurred  there  in  1810,  the 
conductor  being  Spohr.  Out  of  this  grew  many  others,  of  which  the  most 
celebrated  were  the  annual  Lower  Rhine  Festivals,  instituted  at  Dtisseldorf  in 
1818. 

Besides  masters  like  Beethoven,  Weber  and  Schubert,  whose  songs  belong 
to  the  highest  class,  though,  of  course,  with  decided  individual  differences,  and 
the  many  simpler  writers,  to  be  named  among  those  busy  with  popular  educa- 
tion, in  this  period  began  the  fruitfulness  of  Marschner  (d.  1861)  and  of  Lowe 
(d.  1869),  which  reached  to  the  middle  of  the  century  (see  sec.  222). 

The  importance  of  stimulating  part-singing  as  a popular  art  was  beginning 
to  be  recognized  afresh,  and  among  the  helpers  in  this  direction  were  such 
writers  and  teachers  as  Friedrich  Silcher  (d.  i860),  working  first  at  Stuttgart 
and  from  1817  at  Tubingen,  with  many  good  collections,  largely  original,  and 
Xaver  Schnyder  von  Wartensee  (d.  1868),  from  1817  active  at  Frankfort. 
(See  also  sec.  218.) 

Louis  Niedermeyer  (d.  1861),  a Swiss  by  birth,  in  his  early  life  was  an  im- 
portant song-writer,  working  first  at  Geneva  and  from  1823  at  Paris,  and 
making  excellent  settings  of  poems  by  Lamartine,  Hugo  and  other  poets 
(mostly  before  1835).  His  later  activity  was  in  opera  and  especially  sacred 
music  (see  secs.  204,  221). 


CHAPTER  XXVI 


ITALIAN  AND  FRENCH  OPERA 

175.  New  Life  in  the  Italian  Style.  — The  underlying  prin- 
ciple of  the  Italian  opera  has  always  been  the  capture  of  the 
favor  of  audiences,  especially  by  exploiting  brilliant  soloists 
in  highly  colored  or  showy  melodies  and  by  other  devices 
essentially  sensational.  But  between  the  followers  of  this  style 
in  any  given  period  there  has  often  been  much  difference,  some 
being  content  with  imitating  the  vapid,  ad  captandum  ways  of 
their  predecessors,  and  some  reaching  out  with  originality  and 
genius  toward  a better  dramatic  ideal.  At  the  opening  of  the 
19th  century  these  extremes  were  sharply  marked.  On  the 
one  hand  were  the  writers  who  worked  principally  in  Italy 
alone,  often  with  Naples  as  a centre,  who  went  on  gratifying 
the  popular  craving  for  flowing  airs,  clever  effects  and  conven- 
tional comedy  or  pathos  without  real  advance.  On  the  other, 
were  those  aware  of  the  great  movements  going  on  in  other 
departments  of  musical  creation,  generally  because  they  carried 
on  their  work  outside  of  Italy,  and  who  sought  to  infuse  into 
Italian  writing  elements  akin  to  those  elsewhere  prominent. 
Besides  several  worthy,  but  not  highly  inspired,  writers  of  this 
second  class,  the  period  is  notable  for  the  phenomenal  career  of 
Rossini,  who  certainly  had  genius  and  success,  however  he  may 
be  classified  as  to  principles.  His  vogue  spread  throughout 
Europe  and,  with  the  help  of  several  later  writers  of  the  same 
class,  served  to  delay  until  after  the  middle  of  the  century  the 
triumph  of  better  ideas. 

Among  lesser  composers  the  following  were  especially  productive  or 
popular : — 

Vittorio  Trento  (d.  after  1824),  born  at  Venice,  was  active  there  from  his 
youth,  producing  bright  comic  operettas  (from  1780).  In  1797  he  was  in 
London,  gaining  popularity  with  The  Triumph  of  Love  and  other  works,  in- 
cluding Ifigenia  in  Aulide  (1804).  After  1806  he  served  for  a time  as  opera- 
director  at  Amsterdam,  and  later  at  Lisbon.  He  was  very  prolific  — his  Climene 
(18 1 1,  London)  being  numbered  his  53d.  At  Venice  he  had  special  success 
with  Gli  assassini  (1801). 


438 


THE  ITALIAN  OPERA 


439 


Vincenzo  Federici  (d.  1826),  born  at  Pesaro,  after  working  at  London  as 
cembalist  and  composer,  from  1803  was  active  at  Milan  and  Turin,  from  1809 
a teacher  in  the  Milan  conservatory  and  ultimately  its  head.  He  wrote  15 
operas,  including  Castore  e Polluce  (1803),  La  Zaira  (1806)  and  La  locandiera 
scaltra  (1812,  Paris),  in  a style  of  the  Cimarosa  type. 

Giuseppe  Mosca  (d.  1839),  a Neapolitan,  trained  under  Feneroli,  began 
opera-production  at  Rome  (1791).  After  some  years  (1803-9)  at  Paris,  he 
later  was  director  at  Palermo  and  at  Messina.  His  44  operas  were  fluent,  but 
unoriginal.  In  them  appears  the  device  of  a grand  crescendo  which  Rossini 
later  employed.  His  brother,  Luigi  Mosca  (d.  1824),  working  at  Naples, 
wrote  14  operas  (from  1797),  an  oratorio  and  several  masses. 

Pietro  Generali  [Mercandetti]  (d.  1832),  born  at  Rome,  was  a pupil  of 
Durante,  at  first  in  church  music.  From  1800  he  also  produced  about  50 
operas,  mostly  comic,  of  which  / baccanali  di  Roma  (1815,  Venice)  was  the 
chief.  He  is  regarded  as  the  forerunner  of  Rossini.  He  was  finally  choir- 
master at  Novara,  writing  only  sacred  music,  including  the  oratorio  Jefte  (1827). 

Vincenzo  Lavigna  (d.  1837)  was  brought  up  at  Naples  and  began  about  10 
rather  notable  operas  at  Milan  with  La  muta  per  amore  (1802).  In  1809  he 
settled  at  Milan,  where  he  taught  the  young  Verdi. 

Stefano  Pavesi  (d.  1850),  also  a Neapolitan  scholar,  after  curious  military 
adventures,  brought  out  an  opera  at  Venice  (1803)  which  led  to  many  com- 
missions till  1830.  From  1818  he  was  choirmaster  at  Crema,  his  birthplace. 
Of  his  more  than  60  operas,  I baccanali  (1807),  Ser  Marc 1 Antonio  (1810)  and 
La  dontia  bianca  (1830)  may  be  named. 

Giovanni  Tadolini  (d.  1872),  born  at  Bologna  and  educated  there  by  Mattei, 
was  from  1811  Spontini’s  assistant  at  Paris.  Beginning  with  La  fata  Alcina 
(1815,  Venice),  he  secured  decided  popular  favor  by  7 other  operas,  among 
them  II  credulo  delnso  (1817,  Rome).  From  1830  he  was  again  at  Paris,  re- 
turning in  1839  to  Bologna.  He  wrote  excellent  songs  and  romances. 

Although  Italian  opera-writers  were  usually  unaware  of  the 
changes  that  were  setting  in  elsewhere  in  the  world  of  com- 
position, or  unresponsive  to  them,  yet  there  were  some  notable 
exceptions,  chiefly  those  who  lived  and  worked  under  German 
influences.  These  made  various  efforts  to  combine  their  native 
melodiousness  with  stronger  harmony  and  richer  instrumentation, 
sometimes  with  considerable  success.  They  often  carried  the 
public  with  them,  but  as  a rule  failed  to  make  any  permanent 
mark.  Yet  what  they  did  is  worthy  of  mention  as  a sign  of 
the  times. 

As  illustrations  of  this  class,  most  of  whom  were  somewhat  direct  rivals 
of  the  Germans  on  the  one  hand  and  of  Rossini  and  the  French  school  on  the 
other,  the  following  should  be  named  : — 

Ferdinando  Paer  (d.  1839),  born  at  Parma,  after  slight  training,  in  1787 
began  opera-writing  there  in  the  ordinary  style.  He  soon  acquired  reputation 
and  was  called  to  Venice  as  director.  In  1797,  with  his  wife,  a good  singer,  he 


440 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


went  to  Vienna,  where,  learning  from  Mozart’s  style  and  consorting  somewhat 
with  Beethoven,  his  methods  took  on  more  depth  and  value.  In  1803  he  had  so 
far  won  a place  in  Germany  that  he  was  made  choirmaster  at  Dresden,  but  in 
1807  Napoleon  allured  him  away  to  Paris,  where  in  1812  he  succeeded  Spontini, 
remaining  at  the  Opera  under  Louis  XVIII.  and  as  chamber-musician  under 
Louis  Philippe.  His  success  was  not  continued  at  Paris,  owing  to  the  popu- 
larity of  Rossini  and  his  own  tendency  to  intrigue.  Of  his  over  40  operas,  the 
best-known  were  Griselda  (1796,  Parma),  the  famous  Camilla  (1799,  Vienna), 
Achille  (1801,  Vienna),  Sargino  (1803,  Dresden),  / fuorusciti  (1804,  Vienna), 
Eleonora  (1805,  Dresden,  same  subject  as  Beethoven’s  Fidelio ) and  Agnese 
(1811,  Parma).  He  also  wrote  secular  cantatas,  2 Passions,  considerable 
church  music,  and  pieces  for  orchestra  and  for  piano.  His  style  was  flowing, 
without  learning  or  decided  force. 

Simon  Mayr  (d.  1845),  though  a Bavarian,  was  launched  as  composer  at 
Bergamo  and  Venice.  He  was  so  successful  with  oratorios  (from  1791)  and 
church  music  that  Piccinni  advised  his  undertaking  dramatic  music.  His  first 
opera,  Saffo  (1794,  Venice),  caught  the  popular  taste,  and  before  1814  over  70 
more  were  called  for.  From  1802  he  was  cathedral-choirmaster  at  Bergamo 
and  from  1805  also  professor  in  the  new  conservatory,  refusing  numerous 
invitations  elsewhere.  From  1816  he  wrote  only  for  the  church,  and  in  his 
later  years  became  blind.  His  noted  works  for  the  stage  were  Lodolska 
(two  versions,  1795,  Venice,  1800,  Milan),  Ginevra  (1801,  Trieste),  Adelasia 
ed  Aleramo  (1807,  Milan),  Medea  (1812,  Venice)  and  Rosa  biatica  e rosa 
rossa  (1814,  Rome).  Among  his  sacred  works  were  elaborate  Requiems 
and  other  masses,  many  psalms,  etc.  He  exerted  an  important  influence, 
since  he  blended  German  and  Italian  methods  and  was  a thoughtful  student. 
His  chief  pupil  was  Donizetti.  He  published  the  first  biography  of  Haydn 
(1809)  and  left  theoretical  works  in  MS. 

Gasparo  Spontini  (d.  1851),  born  near  Ancona  and  educated  at  Naples  un- 
der Sala  and  Tritto,  began  his  remarkable  career  with  / puntigli  delle  donne 
(1796,  Rome),  followed  by  15  more — all  in  the  fluent  Neapolitan  style. 
In  1803  he  betook  himself  to  Paris,  where  he  soon  entered  upon  a new  period 
which  belongs  in  another  connection  (see  sec.  178). 

Francesco  Morlacchi  (d.  1841),  a pupil  of  Caruso,  Zingarelli  and  Mattei,  at 
first  devoted  himself  to  sacred  composition  (fine  Miserere  for  16  voices). 
His  first  operatic  venture  was  in  1807,  quickly  followed  by  others,  of  which 
the  best  was  Le  Danaide  (1810,  Rome).  From  1810,  like  Paer,  he  was 
choirmaster  at  Dresden,  where  he  became  immensely  popular,  as  he  now 
added  much  from  German  sources  to  his  ready  Italian  manner.  The 
shifting  political  situation  forced  him  within  two  years  to  write  occasional 
pieces  for  both  sides  of  the  struggle  between  Napoleon  and  the  Allies,  his 
sympathies  being  with  the  former.  In  1817  his  position  was  complicated 
by  the  advent  of  Weber,  also  as  choirmaster.  Their  inevitable  rivalry  was 
mitigated  by  Morlacchi’s  frequently  betaking  himself  to  Italy.  He  wrote 
over  20  operas,  the  most  popular,  besides  Le  Danaide , being  Raoul  de 
Crlqui  (1811),  II  bar  bier  di  Siviglia  (1814),  Gianni  di  Parigi  (1818)  and 
Colombo  (1828,  Genoa).  At  his  death  he  was  working  on  Francesca  di  Rimini. 
He  was  a prolific  church  composer,  with  10  solemn  masses  (1810-39),  3 ora- 


THE  ITALIAN  OPERA 


441 


torios,  a Requiem  for  the  King  of  Saxony  (1827),  etc.  His  extraordinary 
reputation  was  temporary,  marking  the  end  of  Italian  supremacy  upon  the 
German  stage. 

The  following  two  composers  stand  apart,  in  that  they  were  more  purely 
Italian  in  method  and  worked  far  on  into  the  next  period.  But  they  are  here 
important  because  brought  into  immediate  relations  with  Rossini. 

Giovanni  Pacini  (d.  1867)  was  a Sicilian,  educated  at  Bologna  and  Venice 
by  Marchesi,  Mattei  and  Furlanetto.  He  began  writing  for  the  stage  at  17 
(1813)  and  during  his  first  period  of  20  years  produced  over  40  operas,  such 
as  La  sacerdotessa  d'Irminsul  (1817,  Trieste),  E ultimo  giorno  di  Pompeia 
(1825,  Naples), Niobe  (1826,  Naples),  and  Gli  Arabi nelle  Gallie  (1828,  Turin). 
His  second  period,  when  his  competition  with  Rossini  became  more  marked, 
began  in  1840  (see  sec.  203). 

Saverio  Mercadante  (d.  1870),  a pupil  of  Zingarelli,  after  serving  as  first 
violin  at  Naples,  made  his  operatic  debut  in  1819,  and  won  renown  with  Elisa  e 
Claudio  (1821,  Milan),  Didone  (1823,  Turin),  Gli  amici  di  Siracusa  (1824, 
Rome) , Doralice  ( 1 824,  Vienna)  and  La  rappresaglia  ( 1 829,  Cadiz) . Later  ex- 
amples from  his  list  of  about  60  operas  were  I briganti  (1836,  Paris),  II giura- 
mento  (18 37,  Milan),  and  Le  due  illustri  rivali  (1839,  Venice).  In  1827-30  he 
worked  mostly  at  Madrid  and  Lisbon,  from  1833  succeeded  Generali  as  choir- 
master at  Novara,  and  from  1840  followed  Zingarelli  as  head  of  the  Naples 
conservatory.  About  this  time  he  lost  the  sight  of  one  eye,  and  finally  became 
totally  blind.  He  also  wrote  much  for  the  church,  as  well  as  many  orchestral 
works,  including  funeral-pieces  for  Bellini,  Donizetti,  Pacini  and  Rossini.  He 
was  gifted,  but  hasty  and  over-fond  of  noisy  rhythm. 

176.  Rossini,  Donizetti  and  Bellini.  — The  stimulating  condi- 
tions of  the  new  century  were  now  strikingly  illustrated  by  the 
rise  of  a group  of  Italian  opera-writers  of  such  varied  gifts  as 
to  give  them  a dominance  that  lasted  until  the  middle  of  the 
century  and  affected  the  whole  progress  of  musical  art.  Of  this 
group  Rossini  was  the  first  to  appear  and  the  most  spectacular. 
But  he  was  soon  reinforced  by  Donizetti  and  Bellini,  who 
shared  in  the  movement  he  created,  although  they  differed  from 
him  in  many  points  of  genius. 

Although  the  lives  of  Rossini  and  Donizetti  extended  much  beyond  the 
first  third  of  the  century  and  their  power  still  longer,  the  movement  was 
fully  outlined  before  1830  and  its  characteristics  plainly  belong  to  that  gen- 
eral period.  They  may  therefore  be  summarily  considered  at  this  point. 

The  whole  operatic  world  was  stirred  about  18 1 5 by  the  advent 
of  Rossini,  the  most  forceful  Italian  genius  since  Scarlatti.  His 
rapid  ascent  to  fame  was  astonishing  and  the  influence  he  ex- 
erted, either  directly  or  through  the  imitators  he  inspired,  was 
immense.  His  power  lay  in  his  sheer  vitality,  the  witty  vivacity 


442 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


of  his  mind,  his  keenness  in  measuring  the  popular  appetite  and 
his  energy  in  keeping  that  appetite  supplied  with  novel  sensa- 
tions. But  he  was  more  than  versatile.  While  not  failing  to 
maintain  the  conditions  of  telling  vocal  effort  through  cantabile 
melodies,  with  their  capacity  for  emotional  impression,  through 
sparkling  coruscations  of  ornament  and  through  all  kinds  of 
concerted  numbers,  he  had  early  become  engaged  through  the 
study  of  German  composers  upon  the  problems  of  instrumenta- 
tion, and  he  saw  the  need  in  Italian  methods  of  radical 
improvement  on  this  side.  He  gradually  deserted  the  bare 
recitative  for  a style  of  accompanied  declamation  more  consist- 
ent with  a sustained  musical  work.  He  gave  great  attention  to 
the  whole  factor  of  accompaniments.  He  enriched  his  scores 
with  novel  effects  in  rhythm,  harmony  and  tone-color,  and  sought 
to  weld  together  successive  items  into  irresistible  cumulations  of 
effect.  With  all  his  instinct  for  popular  eclat  and  his  love  of 
glittering  externals,  he  was  much  more  than  a clever  trickster. 
He  had  positive  technical  genius.  He  represented  the  Italian 
spirit  of  his  day  at  its  acme  of  enterprise.  Yet,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  one  or  two  of  his  best  works,  he  wrought  without  a pro- 
found sense  of  the  nature  of  the  musical  drama.  His  standard 
was  fixed  by  an  ambition  for  immediate  success  with  popular 
audiences  as  he  found  them  rather  than  by  any  inspired  convic- 
tions. Technique  to  him  was  of  greater  moment  than  either 
structure  or  imagination.  He  was  unprincipled  in  his  plagia- 
risms from  other  composers  and  from  his  own  works,  and  he 
often  wrote  with  reckless  and  impudent  haste.  The  narrowness 
of  his  ambition  is  shown  by  his  poverty  of  accomplishment  ex- 
cept in  opera.  The  essential  lack  of  elevation  in  his  artistic 
influence  made  the  movement  of  which  he  was  the  head  a 
positive  obstacle  in  the  way  of  progress  long  after  he  had  ceased 
to  produce. 

Gioachino  Rossini  (d.  1868)  was  born  in  1792  at  Pesaro,  his  father  being  a 
petty  civil  official.  When  he  was  only  4 years  old,  his  father  was  arrested  for 
republican  sympathies  and  his  mother  became  a singer  in  comic  opera,  the  boy 
being  left  to  be  brought  up  by  a butcher  in  Bologna.  His  slender  education 
included  music-lessons,  and  at  10  his  talent  had  already  made  him  worth  some- 
thing as  singer,  horn-player  and  accompanist.  At  13  he  found  good  friends 
in  the  tenor  Babbini  and  the  civil  engineer  Giusti,  who  much  advanced  his 
general  culture.  At  15  he  entered  the  conservatory,  having  lessons  in  coun- 
terpoint under  Mattei.  He  had  no  patience  with  strict  composition,  but  pro- 


ROSSINI 


443 


gressed  rapidly  in  lighter  work.  He  became  absorbed  in  studies  of  Haydn's 
and  Mozart’s  works  (being  called  ‘the little  German’)  and  acquired  facility  in 
orchestration.  He  was  then  and  always  popular  for  his  gay  spirits  and  his 
ready  versatility. 

At  1 8 (1810)  he  wrote  his  first  stage-work,  the  farce  La  cambiale  di  matri- 
monio,  for  a Venice  theatre,  followed  in  1 8 1 1 by  an  opera  buffa  (Bologna) 
and  in  1812  by  an  opera  seria  (Rome).  These  were  so  successful  that  in  the 
next  ten  years  he  was  incessantly  busy,  hurrying  from  city  to  city  and  bring- 
ing out  no  less  than  30  stage-works  of  various  kinds,  mostly  comic  — 9 at 
Venice,  10  at  Naples,  5 each  at  Milan  and  Rome  and  1 at  Lisbon.  His  initial 
success  at  Milan  was  with  La  pietra  del  par agone  (1812),  in  which  he  used  his 
afterwards  overworked  crescendo.  The  first  significant  effort  was  Tancredi 
(1813,  Venice),  which,  though  not  free  from  plagiarisms,  revealed  his  extra- 
ordinary verve  and  ingenuity.  II  turco  in  Italia  (1814,  Milan)  later  came 
into  much  favor.  In  1815,  cast  down  by  a transient  set-back,  he  was  about  to 
drop  composing  when  Barbaja,  the  Naples  manager,  engaged  him  to  prepare 
two  operas  a year  on  a good  salary  (partly  derived  from  the  public  gambling- 
houses,  of  which  Barbaja  was  also  proprietor).  Though  opposed  by  the  Nea- 
politan circle,  he  made  a hit  with  Elisabetta  (1815  — plot  curiously  like  that  of 
Scott’s  ‘ Kenilworth  ’),  in  which  he  began  to  discard  the  recitativo  secco. 
In  the  same  year  at  Rome  he  produced  II  barbiere  di  Siviglia  (first  called 
Almaviva ),  which  at  the  outset  was  resented  because  on  a libretto  already 
famous  with  Paisiello’s  music,  but  which  soon  captivated  the  world  as  the 
brightest  and  wittiest  of  comic  operas.  In  1816  appeared  Otello , in  which  the 
transition  from  pure  recitative  was  carried  to  completion.  1817  was  marked 
by  the  comic  opera  Cenerentola  (Rome),  which  is  counted  as  the  second-best 
in  its  class,  and  by  the  romantic  Armida  (Naples),  which  is  full  of  imagina- 
tive splendor.  In  1818  came  the  partly  noble  Afosi  in  Egitto  (completed  1827), 
which  later  figured  as  an  oratorio,  and  the  florid  Ricciardo  e Zoraide  (both  at 
Naples).  The  violent  revolution  of  1820  at  Naples  drove  out  the  king,  ruined 
Barbaja  and  set  Rossini  planning  a visit  to  Vienna.  On  the  way,  at  Bologna, 
he  married  Isabella  Colbran,  a wealthy  singer,  seven  years  his  senior. 

At  Vienna  he  was  well  received,  made  friends  by  his  humor  and  affability, 
and  secured  applause  for  his  carefully  drafted  Zelmira  (1822).  Soon  after, 
Prince  Metternich  asked  him  to  provide  amusement  for  the  royalties  gathered 
at  the  Congress  of  Verona,  for  which  he  wrote  and  conducted  a series  of 
clever  cantatas.  In  1823  was  produced  one  of  his  most  ambitious  and  thought- 
ful works,  Semirajnide  (Venice),  which,  however,  was  not  at  first  liked.  Late 
in  the  year  he  set  out,  by  way  of  Paris,  for  London,  where  he  was  lionized  by 
high  society,  including  special  favor  from  George  IV. 

During  1824-6  he  was  director  of  the  Thdatre  Italien  at  Paris,  where  he 
decidedly  improved  the  technical  standard  of  performance,  revised  and  re- 
produced some  of  his  earlier  works,  and  brought  out  Ilviaggio  a Reims  (1825), 
as  well  as  Meyerbeer’s  II  crociato , the  first  of  the  latter’s  works  to  be  heard  in 
Paris.  From  1826  he  was  named  Royal  Composer  and  Inspector,  with  a 
salary,  but  no  stated  duties.  He  continued  to  revive  and  improve  old  works 
(notably  his  Most  in  1827),  and  began  seriously  to  study  Beethoven.  In 
1829  he  reached  his  highest  artistic  point  in  Guillaume  Telly  in  which  he 


444 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


successfully  discarded  mannerisms  and  achieved  genuine  dramatic  success 
without  losing  the  brightness  and  ease  of  his  native  style.  Entering  into  a 
new  contract  to  write  only  for  Paris  and  to  supply  a new  work  every  other 
year  for  ten  years,  he  retired  to  Bologna,  filled  with  plans  for  inaugurating  an 
epoch  in  French  musical  drama. 

The  Revolution  of  1830  changed  everything.  His  contract  was  repudiated 
by  the  new  government  (though  later  enforced  by  a lawsuit),  and  the  interest 
in  dramatic  music  fell  ludicrously.  Rossini  returned  to  Paris,  but  wrote  noth- 
ing except  the  flamboyant  Stabat  Mater  (1832).  In  1836  he  heard  Meyer- 
beer’s Les  Hiiguenots , resolved  to  write  no  more  operas,  and  settled  again  at 
Bologna.  In  1843  he  had  a severe  illness,  relieved  by  an  operation.  In  1847, 
forced  out  of  Bologna  by  political  causes,  he  was  married  a second  time  (to 
an  adventuress)  and  removed  to  Florence,  lapsing  into  much  sensuality.  In 
1855  he  came  again  to  Paris,  established  himself  at  Passy  as  a sort  of 
musical  divinity,  indulged  in  some  new  works  and  revamped  some  old  ones, 
cultivated  the  piano  with  much  whimsicality,  and  in  1868  died,  receiving  a 
prodigious  public  funeral.  His  large  property,  after  providing  for  a prize  at 
the  Institut  for  dramatic  composition,  was  mostly  given  to  found  a conserva- 
tory at  his  birthplace  Pesaro. 

In  all,  his  dramatic  works  numbered  about  40,  not  counting  revisions,  and 
his  cantatas  about  10.  His  chief  sacred  works  were  the  Stabat  Mater 
(1832-41)  and  the  Messe  solennelle  (1864),  with  a few  other  short  pieces. 
He  also  wrote  some  miscellaneous  music  for  voice  and  for  piano. 

Donizetti  and  Bellini  differed  from  Rossini,  as  well  as  from 
each  other,  in  the  quality  of  their  genius,  although  with  him 
they  constituted  a group  that  long  held  sway  in  many  quarters. 
Neither  of  them  had  Rossini’s  abounding  vigor  and  variety  or 
his  instrumental  originality,  and  both  tended  to  exalt  forms 
of  melody  that  were  more  sentimental  than  pyrotechnic.  But 
Donizetti  had  some  gift  for  genuine  dramatic  intensity,  though 
he  did  not  always  exert  it,  and  Bellini,  though  wanting  in  vi- 
vacity and  wit,  had  decided  melodic  grace  of  an  emotional  type 
and  considerable  tragic  solemnity.  Of  the  two,  Donizetti  had 
the  broader  musical  culture,  while  Bellini  was  the  more  consist- 
ently poetic.  Neither  of  them  sympathized  with  the  rougher 
and  more  vulgar  sides  of  Rossini’s  style,  though  they  were  ob- 
viously anxious  to  imitate  him  as  far  as  they  could.  Both  con- 
tented themselves  chiefly  with  supplying  works  in  which  flowing 
and  expressive  arias  occupied  the  attention,  usually  with  a neg- 
lect of  the  orchestral  element.  Their  influence  fell  in  with  that 
of  Rossini  to  hold  Italian  opera  in  its  old  position  and  to  retard 
appreciation  by  the  dramatic  public  of  the  vigorous  new  forces 
that  were  at  work. 


DONIZETTI  AND  BELLINI 


445 


Gaetano  Donizetti  (d.  1848),  born  in  1797  at  Bergamo,  a weaver’s  son, 
showed  artistic  aptitudes  from  the  start  and  received  a good  education,  in- 
cluding training  in  music  from  Mayr  at  Bergamo  and  Mattei  at  Bologna.  To 
avoid  becoming  either  a lawyer  or  a teacher,  as  his  father  urged,  he  tried  the 
army,  and  while  stationed  at  Venice  produced  his  first  three  operas  (1818-20), 
with  only  fair  success.  But  Zoraide  di  Granata  (1822,  Rome)  gained  him 
honor  and  a release  from  soldiering.  All  his  early  works  were  plainly  in 
imitation  of  Rossini.  Up  to  the  end  of  1830  he  brought  out  31  operas  — 20 
at  Naples  and  the  rest  at  Venice,  Rome,  Palermo,  Milan,  Mantua  and  Genoa. 

A better  period  opened  with  Anna  Bolena  (1830,  Milan),  and  during  the 
next  14  years  appeared  over  30  more,  of  which  the  most  noted  were,  in  the 
lighter  vein,  Delisir  d''a77iore  (1832,  Milan),  La  Jille  du  regiment  (1840,  Paris) 
and  the  sparkling  Don  Pasquale  (1843,  Paris),  and,  on  the  serious  side, 
Lucrezia  Borgia  (1833,  Milan),  Lucia  di  Lammermoor  (1835,  Naples),  La 
favorite  (1840,  Paris)  and  Linda  di  Cha7nounix  (1842,  Vienna).  Though 
from  1835  holding  official  posts  at  the  Naples  conservatory,  Donizetti  moved 
from  place  to  place,  living  much  at  Paris.  The  strain  of  incessant  production 
brought  on  serious  brain-trouble,  culminating  in  1845  i*1  die  paralysis  from 
which  he  died. 

Beside  his  65  operas,  he  wrote  a large  number  of  songs  and  canzonets, 
many  string-quartets  of  some  value,  masses  and  other  sacred  works,  etc. 

Vincenzo  Bellini  (d.  1835)  was  born  in  1801  at  Catania,  the  son  of  an 
organist,  who  was  his  first  teacher.  At  18  a patron  sent  him  to  Naples  to 
study  with  Tritto  and  Zingarelli,  and  there  he  lingered  for  many  years  (till 
1827),  making  studies  of  both  German  and  Italian  composers,  especially 
Pergolesi,  and  writing  ambitious  trial-works,  including  a symphony  and  a first 
opera  (1825).  The  manager  Barbaja  noted  his  talent  and  called  for  works  at 
both  Naples  and  Milan,  of  which  II  fir  at  a (1827,  Milan)  was  enormously 
successful,  owing  largely  to  the  skill  of  the  tenor  Rubini.  At  intervals  followed 
I Cafidetti  ed  i Mo7itecchi  (1830,  Venice),  La  son7ia77ibida  (1831,  Milan), 
Nor7na  (1831,  Milan)  and  I Purita7ii  (1835,  Paris),  with  some  less  striking 
works,  10  in  all.  After  1827  the  able  librettist  of  all  except  the  last  was 
Felice  Ro7/ia7ii  (d.  1865).  A few  months  after  the  first  giving  of  I Pur  it  ani 
0835)  persistent  labor  brought  on  a fatal  illness,  adding  another  name  to  the 
list  of  short-lived  composers.  The  funeral  was  a notable  tribute  of  respect 
and  affection  from  the  composers  and  singers  of  Paris. 

177.  The  French  Opera  Comique. — At  the  opening  of  the  cen- 
tury the  French  taste  for  dramatic  music  found  its  greatest  sat- 
isfaction in  forms  like  the  ‘ vaudeville’  (a  song-play  with  much 
spoken  dialogue)  and  the  * opera  comique  ’ (derived  from  the 
Italian  opera  buffa  and  distinguished  also  by  some  admixture  of 
dialogue).  But  the  Parisian  stage  at  this  epoch  was  also 
a favorite  arena  for  the  more  sustained  and  ambitious  opera 
seria,  though  usually  by  composers  of  foreign  origin  or  training. 
In  the  competition  between  the  lighter  and  the  heavier  types 


446 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


the  opera  comique  tended  to  adopt  the  technical  ways  of  its 
statelier  cousin,  so  that  the  merely  formal  distinctions  between 
the  two  were  diminishing.  Notable  changes  were  the  repla- 
cing of  spoken  dialogue  by  some  sort  of  accompanied  recitative, 
and  the  elaboration  of  ensemble  effects  at  the  ends  of  the  acts. 
These  movements  resulted  on  the  one  hand  in  giving  the  opera 
comique  a stronger  individuality  and,  on  the  other,  in  setting  up 
a French  type  of  grand  opera  with  literary  characteristics  that 
allied  it  slightly  with  the  German  romantic  opera,  and  musical 
ones  that  resembled  those  of  the  Italian  opera  seria,  while  its 
spirit  and  flavor  remained  essentially  French.  The  influences 
that  combined  in  the  final  outcome  on  both  sides  were  many  and 
complicated,  traceable  partly  to  Weber,  partly  to  Rossini,  partly 
to  purely  French  traditions.  For  purposes  of  thought,  the  opdra 
comique  and  the  grand  opera  should  be  discussed  separately, 
but  their  reactions  upon  each  other  were  constant  and  pro- 
found. 

The  1 opdra  comique  ’ is  essentially  entertaining.  Its  appeal  comes  from 
a dexterous  union  of  a piquant  plot,  laughable  situations,  a spicy  text, 
clever  acting,  varied  styles  of  song  and  sparkling  instrumentation.  In 
melody  and  movement,  in  dialogue  and  ensemble,  in  the  blending  of 
vocalism  with  orchestration,  it  must  be  adapted  to  instant  appreciation. 
Yet  the  finish  of  detail  must  gratify  the  cultured  taste,  and  the  histrionic 
and  musical  elements  must  be  thoroughly  amalgamated.  From  the 
typical  opera  buffa  it  is  separated  by  its  higher  literary  quality,  by  its  wit 
and  satire,  by  its  disdain  of  long-drawn  melodies  of  a sentimental  cast,  by 
the  dash  and  glitter  of  its  instrumentation,  by  its  elastic  dramatic  struc- 
ture. From  the  older  vaudeville  it  differed  much  as  the  German  roman- 
tic opera  differed  from  the  singspiel,  in  musical  elaboration  and  unity. 
From  the  grand  opera  it  differed  at  first  in  the  use  of  some  spoken  dia- 
logue, but  chiefly  in  its  topics,  in  avoiding  tragic  or  heroic  sentiments,  and 
in  requiring  little  sustained  effort  from  the  hearer.  Ostensibly  the  op^ra 
comique  declined  to  aspire  to  the  highest  and  most  serious  art,  and 
yet  afforded  scope  for  extreme  artistic  finesse.  Thus,  without  setting 
before  itself  any  urgent  program  of  achievement,  it  adjusted  itself  per- 
fectly to  the  French  temperament,  becoming,  like  the  non-musical  drama 
of  society,  a mirror  of  manners  and  social  ideas,  and  often  a vehicle  of 
delicious  satire. 

It  should  be  noted  that  the  Italian  opera  buffa  was  originally 
a genuine  ‘ comic  opera,’  having  a subject,  characters  and  situa- 
tions that  were  distinctly  ridiculous.  In  the  French  opera  co- 
mique, and  in  all  the  other  allied  forms  of  the  19th  century,  the 


THE  OPERA  COMIQUE 


447 


farcical  element  was  by  no  means  constant.  Many  works  are 
true  ‘ comedies  ’ or  4 comedy-operas,’  being  distinguished  from 
the  serious  opera  by  the  lighter  quality  of  their  materials 
and  the  piquant  course  of  their  plots.  It  was  this  latter  tendency 
that  made  it  easy  for  the  opera  comique,  for  instance,  to  pass 
over  later  into  the  ‘ drame  lyrique,’  with  its  accent  upon  poetic 
fancy  and  elegant  construction  (see  sec.  204). 

An  institution  that  has  been  enormously  influential  upon  the  trend  of  all 
French  musical  art  was  the  Conservatoire  de  musique.  This  was  nomi- 
nally a product  of  the  Revolution  epoch,  being  organized  in  1795.  But 
back  of  it  lay  two  previous  enterprises,  the  Ecole  royale  du  chant  (1784) 
and  the  Ecole  gratuite  de  musique  or  Institut  national  (1792),  the  latter 
of  which  was  at  first  meant  to  utilize  as  instructors  the  members  of  the 
Garde  Nationale  and  to  supply  musicians  for  the  army.  The  head 
of  the  former  enterprise  was  the  symphonist  Gossec , and  of  the  latter 
the  bandmaster  Bernard  Sarrette  (d.  1858),  a man  of  remarkable  enthusi- 
asm, pertinacity  and,  as  it  proved,  executive  ability.  After  a brief  initial 
experiment  with  other  managers,  in  1796  Sarrette  was  made  director. 
Although  his  training  had  not  been  comprehensive,  under  him  the  new  in- 
stitution at  once  leaped  into  a commanding  position,  especially  as  regards 
dramatic  music.  The  liberal  annual  subsidy  from  the  government 
(originally  about  $50,000)  enabled  him  to  gather  a remarkable  array  of 
talent  in  the  teaching  force  and  to  lay  out  instruction  on  broad  lines. 
He  continued  until  thrown  out  by  the  political  changes  of  1814-5.  Since 
then  the  governmental  support  has  usually  provided  well  for  faculty, 
library  and  other  equipment,  buildings  and  prizes.  The  number  of  pupils 
has  averaged  about  600,  and  that  of  the  instructors  is  now  about  80.  There 
is  now  an  extensive  system  of  related  schools  in  the  provinces  (at  Lille, 
Nancy,  Nantes,  Rennes,  Dijon,  Lyons,  Toulouse,  etc.).  The  directors 
since  Sarrette  have  been  Perne  (from  1816),  Cherubini  (from  1822), 
Auber  (from  1842),  Ambroise  Thomas  (from  1871),  Dubois  (from  1896) 
and  Faure  (from  1906).  The  later  eminence  of  the  institution  is  due  to 
the  artistic  breadth  and  administrative  wisdom  of  Cherubini  and  Auber. 

The  relation  of  the  Conservatoire  to  dramatic  music  has  been  close  and 
constant.  Indeed,  through  all  its  early  history  the  cultivation  of  this 
was  its  one  great  object  — thus  differing  from  some  other  analogous  enter- 
prises. The  most  coveted  of  the  prizes  offered  is  the  Prix  de  Rome 
(established  in  1803),  given  for  excellence  in  dramatic  composition  and 
entitling  the  holder  to  four  years  in  Italy. 

One  of  the  undertakings  of  the  Conservatoire  has  been  the  publication 
of  official  text-books  in  harmony,  singing,  piano-playing,  etc.  These  have 
conduced  powerfully  to  unity  and  thoroughness,  though  sometimes  their 
continued  use  has  delayed  wholesome  progress. 

Parallel  with  the  Conservatoire,  though  controlled  by  different  principles, 
are  the  subsidized  opera-houses  of  Paris,  of  which  the  Grand  Opera  is 
the  chief  (administered  under  the  name  of  the  1 Acaddmie  de  musique  ’), 


448 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


devoted  to  musical  drama  of  the  highest  class.  The  operas  comiques  at 
the  opening  of  the  19th  century  were  especially  encouraged  by  two  rival 
enterprises,  the  more  conservative  Thedtre  Favart  and  the  more  radical 
Thedtre  Feydeau , which,  after  ruinous  competition,  were  united  in  the 
Opera-  Comique. 

Of  the  18th-century  opera-writers  (see  sec  155)  several  retained  active 
influence  after  1800,  especially  GrStry  (d.  1813),  Cherubini  (d.  1842),  M6hul 
(d.  1817)  and  Le  Sueur  (d.  1837).  Of  these,  Cherubini  was  obviously  the 
most  able,  though  not  characteristically  French. 

Francois  Adrien  Boieldieu  (d.  1834)  was  the  founder  of  the  new  era  in  the 
opera  comique.  Born  at  Rouen  and  indifferently  brought  up,  he  there  essayed 
two  operas  (1793-5)  and  many  songs  that  gave  him  experience  and  a local 
name.  In  1795  he  went  to  Paris  and  gradually  secured  recognition,  especially 
by  La  famille  suisse  (1797)  and  Le  Calif e de  Bagdad  (1800).  Some  grace- 
ful piano  and  chamber  pieces  won  for  him  in  1800  a place  as  teacher  of  piano 
at  the  Conservatoire.  He  profited  from  contact  with  Mehul  and  Cherubini, 
and  kept  up  diligent  study,  as  was  shown  by  Ma  ta7ite  Aurore  (1803).  An 
unfortunate  marriage  with  a ballet-dancer  may  have  been  one  occasion  for 
his  sudden  going  in  1803  to  St.  Petersburg,  where  he  became  court-choir- 
master, but  where,  though  nominally  obligated  to  produce  three  operas  a year, 
he  accomplished  little. 

Returning  to  Paris  in  1811,  he  made  hits  with  one  or  two  old  works  and 
especially  with  Jean  de  Paris  (1812).  In  1817  he  succeeded  M^hul  at  the 
Conservatoire,  and  brought  out  Le  petit  chaperon  rouge  (1818).  After  an  in- 
terval, and  then  in  direct  competition  with  the  overladen  style  of  Rossini,  came 
his  masterpiece,  La  dame  blanche  (1825),  which  scored  a phenomenal  triumph 
and  still,  after  hundreds  of  representations,  holds  its  freshness.  In  this  were 
combined  with  utmost  skill  and  elegance  naive  melody,  strong  character- 
drawing and  fine  dramatic  grouping.  His  last  work,  Les  deux  nuits  (1829), 
was  not  successful,  owing  to  its  libretto,  and  he  gradually  succumbed  to  con- 
sumption. In  all,  he  wrote  about  a dozen  operas  alone  and  collaborated  with 
various  composers  in  about  as  many  more.  His  genius  had  no  great  breadth, 
but  his  refinement  and  delicacy  of  touch  were  exquisite  — a grateful  contrast 
to  the  noisy  showiness  of  Rossini. 

More  or  less  contemporary  with  Boieldieu  and  helping  forward  the  move- 
ment of  which  he  was  finally  the  leader  were  the  following : — 

Henri  Montan  Berton  (d.  1844),  the  son  of  P.  M.  Berton,  after  slight  train- 
ing, undertook  light  opera  at  17  (1784).  From  1795  he  was  professor  of  har- 
mony at  the  Conservatoire  and  from  1816  of  composition.  From  1807  he  was 
conductor  at  the  Theatre  Italien.  Among  his  almost  50  operas,  many  written 
jointly  with  others,  were  Ponce  de  Leo?i  (1797),  Mo7itano  et  Stephanie  (1799), 
Le  delire  (1799),  Aline  (1803),  Franqoise  de  Foix  (1809),  etc.,  besides  ora- 
torios, cantatas  and  songs.  He  was  a ready  melodist,  but  superficial  in  con- 
struction. His  literary  works  were  many,  but  not  striking.  He  was  bitterly 
hostile  to  Rossini. 

Rodolphe  Kreutzer  (d.  1831),  the  violinist,  though  of  German  descent,  was 
born  at  Versailles  and  all  his  life  was  identified  with  Paris.  From  1790  he 


THE  OPERA  OOMIQUE 


449 


produced  over  40  operas  of  moderate  value,  but  Paid et  Virginie  and  Lodoiska 
(both  1791)  were  popular  for  a time. 

Luc  Loiseau  de  Persuis  (d.  1819),  finely  educated  as  a violinist,  came  to 
Paris  in  1787  to  produce  an  oratorio.  His  gifts  as  a player  secured  him  good 
positions,  including  (from  1810)  leadership  at  the  Opera.  He  was  ambitious 
and  energetic,  and,  with  the  aid  of  his  friend  Le  Sueur,  secured  a hearing  for 
about  20  operas  (from  1791)  and  ballets,  but  was  chiefly  important  as 
manager  and  conductor. 

Nicol6  Isouard  (d.  1818)  was  more  able.  Born  at  Malta,  but  trained  at 
Paris  for  a naval  and  business  life,  while  acting  as  a clerk  at  Palermo  and 
Naples  he  assiduously  studied  music,  so  that  at  20  (1795)  he  began  opera- 
production  at  Bologna,  and  later  was  organist  and  choirmaster  at  Malta, 
diligently  exercising  himself  in  composition.  From  1799  he  was  in  Paris,  a 
favorite  society  pianist,  in  close  touch  with  Kreutzer  and  with  able  librettists, 
and  writing  about  50  operas,  of  which  the  best-received  were  Cendrillon  (1810), 
Joconde  (1814)  and  Jeannot  et  Colin  (1814).  He  belongs  to  the  same  refined 
and  delightfully  clear  class  as  Boieldieu,  but  was  less  original  and  careful. 
The  latter’s  success  embittered  him,  occasioning  the  dissipation  that  cut  short 
his  life. 

Charles  Simon  Catel  (d.  1830)  studied  under  Gossec  and  Sacchini  at  the 
Ecole  royale  and  early  entered  its  teaching  force.  From  1790,  besides 
accompanying  at  the  Opdra,  he  was  one  of  the  leaders  of  the  National  Guard 
music,  for  which  he  wrote  extensively.  From  1795  he  was  prominent  at  the 
Conservatoire.  He  wrote  11  operas  (from  1802)  in  a highly  elegant  style,  but 
they  were  not  popular,  owing  to  their  supposed  learning.  Examples  are 
Semiramis  (1802),  Les  Bayaderes  (1810)  and  Wallace  (1817).  He  was 
useful  in  systemizing  music-study,  and  wrote  an  excellent  text-book  on 
harmony  (1802). 

Giuseppe  Blangini  (d.  1841),  a choirboy  at  Turin  and  a pupil  of  Ottani, 
early  noted  as  a tenor  and  ’cellist,  in  1799  came  to  Paris,  where  he  became 
the  rage  as  a singing-teacher.  From  1806  he  held  positions  under  members 
of  the  Napoleon  family,  continuing  under  Louis  XVIII.,  but  being  thrown  out 
in  1830.  Of  his  30  operas  (from  1803),  many  did  not  come  to  representation. 
Yet  he  was  a graceful  writer,  excelling  in  romances  and  vocal  notturni. 

Giuseppe  Catrufo  (d.  1851),  born  at  Naples  and  trained  by  Sala  and  Tritto, 
brought  out  his  first  operas  at  Malta  (1792)  and  in  northern  Italy,  in  1804  settled 
at  Geneva  and  began  a series  of  about  15  French  operettas,  from  1813  at 
Paris.  The  most  notable  of  these  was  Felicie  (1815).  From  1835  he  worked 
in  London. 

Daniel  Francois  Esprit  Auber  (d.  1871)  was  the  successor  of  Boieldieu,  and 
and  in  fertility  and  piquant  brilliancy  his  superior.  He  was  born  in  1782  at 
Caen,  the  son  of  an  art-dealer  who  vainly  desired  him  to  enter  business.  At 
Paris  and  London  he  early  had  musical  advantages  and  began  writing  songs 
and  pieces  for  the  ’cello  and  the  violin.  His  first  opera  (1 8 1 1 ) was  drafted 
for  a private  circle  of  amateurs.  Cherubini,  hearing  it,  offered  to  guide  his 
further  study.  As  fruits  of  this  came  a mass  and  two  more  operas  (1812-3), 
the  second  of  which  was  publicly  given.  Neither  this  nor  the  next  (1819) 
won  much  notice,  but  La  bergere  chatelaine  (1820)  gave  him  a foremost  place 

2G 


450 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


among  composers  of  opdra  comique.  His  quick  and  sure  renown  was  largely 
due  to  his  association  for  forty  years  with  the  gifted  librettist  Eughie  Scribe 
(d.  1861).  Between  them  were  produced  about  40  works,  mostly  of  the 
comedy  class,  of  which  noted  instances  were  Le  viaqon  (1825),  Fra  Diavolo 
(1830),  Le  Dieu  et  la  Bayadere  (1830),  Le  cheval  de  bronze  (1835)  and  Les 
diamants  de  la  couro?me  (1841).  In  La  ?nuette  de  Portici  [ Masaniello ] 
(1828)  he  turned  aside  from  his  usual  path  to  meet  Spontini,  Rossini  and 
Meyerbeer  on  their  own  ground  with  a historical  drama  of  remarkable  beauty 
and  power  (so  telling  in  its  portrayal  of  revolutionary  sentiments  as  to  have 
had  a share  in  evoking  the  political  uprising  in  Belgium  in  1830). 

In  1829  he  became  an  Academician.  In  1842  he  succeeded  Cherubini  as 
head  of  the  Conservatoire,  remaining  in  service  almost  30  years  and  evincing 
great  tact  and  ability,  though  during  the  last  10  years  he  had  difficulties  with 
Lassabathie,  the  government  supervisor.  From  1857  he  was  imperial  choir- 
master to  Napoleon  III.  He  was  singularly  modest  and  retiring,  but  not 
wanting  in  energy  or  wit.  He  was  devoted  to  Paris  and  hardly  left  it  for  a 
full  half-century,  remaining  even  during  the  siege  by  the  Germans  in  1870. 

In  style  his  music  is  full  of  sparkle  and  spirit,  not  usually  strong  in  pas- 
sionate or  ensemble  effects,  but  skillful  on  the  side  of  melody  and  orchestration. 
There  is  about  it  always  a fascinating  polish  and  elegance.  He  is  often 
spoken  of  as  the  last  of  the  masters  of  the  old  opera  comique ; and  was 
highly  respected  as  a Nestor  among  opera-writers. 

Louis  Joseph  Ferdinand  Harold  (d.  1833)  belongs  in  the  same  class  with 
Boieldieu  and  Auber,  but  his  achievements  were  more  limited.  Born  in  1791, 
the  son  of  a good  pianist,  he  studied  at  the  Conservatoire  under  Catel,  Adam 
and  Mehul,  winning  the  Prix  de  Rome  in  1812  and  then  working  at  Naples 
to  good  purpose,  especially  in  orchestral  writing.  There  he  gave  his  first 
opera  (1815).  Returning  by  way  of  Vienna  to  Paris,  he  joined  Boieldieu  in 
an  ephemeral  work  (1816),  upon  which  followed  his  own  very  successful  Les 
rosibres  and  La  clochette  (both  1817).  In  restless  eagerness  he  now  produced 
several  operas  upon  inferior  librettos,  with  the  exception  of  Le  muletier  (1823), 
wrote  quantities  of  salon  music  for  the  piano,  including  many  sonatas,  served 
in  1820-7  as  accompanist  and  trainer  at  the  Theatre  Italien  and  from  1827  as 
chorusmaster  at  the  Opera,  where  he  produced  a series  of  ballets  of  such  expres- 
sive grace  that  they  permanently  raised  the  artistic  quality  of  the  form.  He 
then  displayed  his  real  ability  in  three  fine  works,  Marie  (1826),  Zamfia  (1831) 
and  Le  fire  aux  clercs  (1832),  the  last  two  setting  him  high  among  his  con- 
temporaries, almost  side  by  side  with  Weber  himself.  Unfortunately,  he  then 
fell  a victim  to  consumption,  being  but  42  years  old.  His  last  work,  Ludovic , 
was  finished  by  Haldvy  (1833)  and  was  well  received.  He  had  all  the  traits 
of  brilliant  refinement  that  belonged  to  his  school,  with  rather  noticeable 
dramatic  and  orchestral  gifts  of  his  own.  But  circumstances  checked  his 
development  and  his  influence. 

It  remains  to  mention  Michele  Carafa  [di  Colobrano]  (d.  1872),  who  had  a 
career  somewhat  like  that  of  Catrufo.  He  was  born  at  Naples,  studied  under 
Ruggi  and  Feneroli,  began  there  as  an  opera-writer  (1802)  and  then  entered 
the  French  army.  From  1814  he  wrote  nearly  10  Italian  operas,  mostly  for 


THE  HISTORICAL  OPERA 


451 


Naples,  and  from  1821  about  20  for  Paris.  The  most  popular  were  Le  soli- 
taire (1822)  and  Masaniello  (1827),  the  latter  competing  with  Auber’s 
masterpiece.  From  1827  he  lived  at  Paris  and  from  1840  was  on  the  Conser- 
vatoire staff.  His  style  was  hasty  and  unoriginal,  but  not  unattractive. 

As  an  exaggerated  instance  of  the  operas  written  in  collaboration, 
which  were  frequent  during  this  period,  may  be  cited  La  Marquise  de 
Brmvilliers  (1831),  prepared  by  no  less  than  nine  composers  — 
Auber,  Batton,  Berton,  Blangini,  Boieldieu,  Carafa,  Cherubini,  Herold 
and  Paer. 

Here  may  be  inserted  a note  upon  two  composers  in  Portugal  and  Spain, 
whose  work  was  loosely  connected  with  the  movements  here  described  : — 

Marcos  Antonio  Portogallo  (d.  1830)  was  born  in  1762  at  Lisbon.  After 
study  there  and  at  Madrid,  where  he  was  accompanist  at  the  Opera,  he  went 
to  Italy,  speedily  appearing  as  a composer.  II  ntolinaro  and  L'astuto  (both 
1790 ) gave  him  renown  and  were  followed  by  about  25  others  in  quick  succes- 
sion, among  them  II  Principe  di  Spazzacatnino , Fernando  in  Messico  (1797) 
and  II  filosofo  seducente  (1798).  From  1790  he  had  been  court-choirmaster 
at  Lisbon,  which  he  visited  at  intervals,  and  from  1799  he  became  opera- 
director  there,  continuing  to  write  both  comic  and  serious  works.  In  1810 
he  followed  the  royal  family  to  Rio  de  Janeiro,  where  he  spent  most  of  his 
later  life.  His  operas  numbered  about  40,  many  of  them  widely  known  in 
Europe.  He  also  wrote  extensively  for  the  church. 

Ramon  Carnicer  (d.  1855)  was  a Catalonian,  trained  at  Barcelona,  where 
he  produced  his  first  opera  (1818).  After  1820  he  appeared  with  success  at 
Paris  and  London.  From  1828  he  was  conductor  at  Madrid  and  from  1830 
professor  in  the  conservatory.  He  is  called  the  founder  of  the  ‘zarzuela’  or 
Spanish  operetta.  Of  his  9 operas  the  best  was  Colombo  (1831).  He  also 
composed  freely  in  other  forms. 

178.  The  Historical  Opera.  — While  the  romantic  opera  in  Ger- 
many and  the  opera  comique  in  France  were  thus  winning  their 
way  to  perfection  and  acceptance,  the  old  and  severer  type  of 
opera  was  not  wholly  laid  aside.  It  is  true  that  the  classical 
type  of  Gluck,  even  as  perpetuated  and  enriched  by  Cherubini, 
was  losing  its  hold.  But  a new  style  was  being  evolved  which 
preserved  the  large  lines,  the  pathetic  quality  and  the  stateliness 
of  detail,  but  applied  them  to  topics  that  lay  close  to  the  deep 
national  enthusiasms  now  everywhere  awakening,  and  brought 
into  the  treatment  every  new  resource  of  vocal  and  instrumental 
effect.  This  type  may  be  called  the  ‘ historical,’  if  we  emphasize 
the  class  of  subjects  in  which  it  found  its  greatest  power.  Tech- 
nically, it  is  better  known  as  the  French  ‘ grand  ’ opera,  to  dis- 
tinguish it  from  all  lighter  types  and  locate  it  in  the  country 
that  was  its  favorite  habitat. 


452 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


In  France  the  grand  opera  was  expected  to  consist  of  five  acts,  with 
elaborate  ballets  in  the  second  and  fourth,  and  to  have  neither  spoken 
dialogue  nor  bare  recitative,  but  to  be  orchestrally  accompanied  through- 
out. In  this  sense  Weber’s  Euryanthe  was  a grand  opera,  though  it 
does  not  belong  to  the  dramatic  class  here  under  consideration. 

The  exact  point  at  which  the  historical  type  began  cannot  be 
stated,  since  it  became  distinct  only  gradually.  The  peculiar 
quality  of  Spontini’s  genius  had  much  to  do  with  its  defini- 
tion, and  Meyerbeer  became  ultimately  its  chief  promoter. 
From  about  1825  it  proved  attractive  to  many  writers,  some  of 
whom  did  not  pursue  it  except  in  one  or  two  works. 

Among  the  most  noted  examples  by  the  opera-writers  already  named 
are  Masaniello  by  both  Carafa  (1827)  and  Auber  (1828),  Guillaume  Tell 
by  Rossini  (1829),  Colo?nbo  by  both  Morlacchi  (1828)  and  Carnicer 
(1831),  Anna  Bolena  by  Donizetti  (1830),  Lucrezia  Borgia  by  Donizetti 
(1833),  I Puritani  by  Bellini  (1835),  etc.  Herold’s  Zampa  (1831)  was  a 
striking  example  of  a grand  opera  upon  a fanciful  subject. 

This  type  of  opera  had  great  significance.  For  one  thing, 
it  was  really  cosmopolitan,  though  the  historical  facts  used 
were  apparently  national,  since  its  emphasis,  even  in  the  midst 
of  any  amount  of  local  color,  was  necessarily  upon  the  broadly 
human  and  heroic.  It  afforded  scope  for  the  musical  ex- 
pression of  the  grander  and  more  passionate  dramatic  sen- 
timents, with  the  cooperation  of  every  device  of  stage-setting, 
vocal  utterance  and  instrumental  depiction.  In  its  appeal  to  the 
imagination  and  the  heart  it  was  profoundly  serious  and  valua- 
ble, while  at  the  same  time  it  might  be  universally  entertaining. 
It  had  all  the  sincerity  of  the  German  romantic  opera  with 
more  reality  in  its  materials  and  with  a far  greater  chance  for 
tragic  appeal.  Its  relation  with  literature  was  obvious,  but 
with  a literature  based  upon  facts  rather  than  pure  fancy.  Yet 
its  genesis  and  its  popularity  arose  not  from  a conscious  inten- 
tion to  use  the  musical  drama  didactically,  but  from  a grow- 
ing recognition  of  the  imaginative  and  symbolic  aspect  that  all 
history  wears. 

Gasparo  Spontini  (d.  1851)  is  as  hard  to  classify  absolutely  as  Cherubini. 
Both  were  Italians  (see  sec.  175),  but  attained  their  artistic  eminence  under 
German  influence  and  in  France.  When  Spontini  first  came  to  France  in 
1803  his  style  was  not  well  received.  But  he  at  once  made  such  careful 
studies  of  Mozart  and  Gluck  that  his  Milton  (1804),  though  short,  was  felt  to 


SPONTINI 


453 


be  the  precursor  of  a totally  new  style,  full  of  beauty  and  sentiment.  This 
was  followed  by  the  nobly  conceived  and  carefully  executed  La  vestale  (1807), 
which  not  only  swept  all  popular  hostility  before  it,  but  won  the  special  prize 
offered  by  Napoleon  and  adjudicated  by  Mehul,  Gossec  and  Grdtry.  This 
in  turn  was  followed  by  Fernand  Cortez  (1809,  remodeled  1817  and  1823), 
which  belongs  to  the  same  grand  class.  The  excellence  of  these  was  largely 
the  fruit  of  the  dramatic  genius  of  the  librettist  Etienne  de  Jony  (d.  1846) 
who  not  only  supplied  fine  texts,  but  influenced  the  composer  in  forming 
his  new  style.  In  1809  Spontini  married  the  daughter  of  J.  B.  Erard  (brother 
of  the  famous  piano-maker).  In  1810-2  he  was  conductor  of  the  Theatre 
Italien,  where  he  instituted  great  improvements  in  the  repertory  and  represen- 
tations, including  the  first  performance  at  Paris  of  Mozart’s  Don  Giovanni  in 
its  original  form,  and  organized  series  of  concerts  at  which  Haydn’s  sym- 
phonies and  other  German  music  were  given.  From  1814  he  was  court- 
composer  to  Louis  XVIII.  and  wrote  several  ‘occasional’  stage-pieces  for 
the  new  regime  and,  after  prolonged  labor,  the  opera  Olympie  (1819),  which 
he  regarded  as  his  masterpiece,  though  its  value  was  only  slowly  admitted  by 
the  public  and  chiefly  in  Germany. 

In  1820,  as  the  fruit  of  negotiations  that  began  in  1814,  he  was  made 
director  of  opera  to  the  king  of  Prussia,  with  a large  salary,  extraordinary 
facilities  and  ample  liberty.  The  Berlin  opera  had  become  the  best  in 
Germany,  owing  to  the  exertions  of  Count  Briihl,  who  had  been  supervisor 
since  1815.  Spontini  and  Briihl  were  awkwardly  conjoined  in  the  manage- 
ment, and  Spontini’s  idiosyncrasies  involved  complications.  Still,  he  scored 
a phenomenal  success  by  the  renderings  of  his  three  great  operas,  which  he 
prepared  with  unheard-of  deliberation  and  pains.  But  at  this  juncture 
Weber’s  Der  FreischUtz  was  first  given,  and  immediately  public  favor  began 
to  veer  away  from  Spontini.  He  struggled  to  compete  with  Nurmahal 
(1822)  and  Alcidor  (1825),  but  the  librettos  were  poor  and  fanciful  subjects 
were  unsuited  to  his  mind.  He  rose  once  more  to  his  grand  style  in  Agnes 
von  Hohenstaufen  (1829),  and  for  years  kept  at  work  upon  sundry  extensive 
projects,  never  completed.  In  1840  came  a change  of  monarchs.  His 
enemies  entrapped  him  into  a show  of  disloyalty  for  which  he  was  legally 
convicted,  but  in  1841  he  received  a technically  honorable  dismissal.  He 
never  recovered  from  his  disappointment  and  disgrace,  and,  except  on  rare 
occasions,  spent  his  last  years  in  obscurity. 

His  character  was  suspicious,  despotic  and  finical.  His  technical  equip- 
ment, especially  in  harmony,  was  defective.  His  genius  lacked  variety  and 
lightness  of  touch.  Yet  he  was  a most  patient  worker,  a follower  of  ideals, 
and  a born  dramatist.  The  stern  vigor  of  his  personality  came  out  in  his 
terrific  discipline  at  rehearsals,  in  the  prodigious  intensity  of  the  effects  he 
sought  and  in  the  serious  elevation  of  his  best  works.  His  career  was 
tragic,  but  not  without  useful  consequences. 

The  instinct  for  practical  success  in  sustained  effort  which 
Spontini  lacked  was  conspicuous  in  his  versatile  and  ambitious 
contemporary  Meyerbeer,  whose  life  and  work  belonged  both 


454 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


to  the  present  period  and  to  the  next,  but  who  may  well  be 
considered  here  because  expressive  of  the  tendency  toward  the 
grand  historical  opera. 

Giacomo  Meyerbeer  [properly  Jacob  Meyer-Beer,  the  ‘ Meyer 1 being  adopted 
at  the  wish  of  a rich  relative]  (d.  1864)  was  born  at  Berlin  in  1791  of  wealthy 
and  cultivated  Jewish  parents,  who  gave  him  every  opportunity.  He  early 
studied  with  Lauska  and  Clementi,  becoming  a concert-pianist  at  6,  and  with 
Zelter,  B.  A.  Weber  and,  in  1810-2,  Vogler.  While  at  Darmstadt  with  the 
latter  and  having  as  fellow-pupils  Weber  and  Gansbacher,  he  wrote  an  orato- 
rio (1 81 1,  Berlin)  and  two  contrasted  operas,  one  sacred,  the  other  comic 
(both  1813,  Munich).  In  1814,  when  the  latter,  Abbnelek  or  Die  beiden  Kali- 
fen , was  repeated  at  Vienna,  Meyerbeer  heard  Hummel  play  and  forthwith 
proceeded  to  reconstruct  his  own  style  to  match,  with  good  public  success. 
But  dramatic  composition  was  his  ambition,  and  he  accepted  Salieri's  advice 
to  make  his  style  more  fresh,  elastic  and  vocal  by  Italian  study. 

From  1815  he  was  in  Venice,  carried  away  by  Rossini’s  warmth  and  fluency 
and  winning  a series  of  local  triumphs  with  some  5 Italian  operas,  of  which 
Romilda  e Costanze  (1815,  Padua)  was  the  first  and  Margherita  d'  Angiii 
(1820,  Milan)  the  best.  He  also  wrote  a German  opera,  Das  brandenburger 
Thor  (not  given),  in  connection  with  which  his  German  friends,  especially 
Weber,  sought  to  recall  him  from  his  path  of  imitation,  the  result  being  in// 
crociato  in  Egitto  (1824,  Venice)  a signal  triumph,  with  some  indications  of 
his  later  power.  This  work  was  given  by  Rossini  at  Paris  in  1826,  which  fact 
led  to  Meyerbeer’s  going  thither  to  live,  producing  nothing  for  several  years. 

Having  made  exhaustive  studies  in  the  literature  of  French  opera  and 
having  joined  forces  with  the  librettist  Scribe,  Meyerbeer  now  advanced  by  a 
single  stride  to  his  most  characteristic  style  in  Robert  le  Diable  (1831,  Paris), 
which  is  both  romantic  and  historical  in  topic  and  both  Italian  and  French 
in  detail,  with  a bold  and  novel  richness  of  total  effect.  This  was  followed  by 
the  epoch-making  Les  Huguenots  (1836,  Paris),  and  after  a time  by  Le  ProphUe 
(completed  1843,  but  not  given  till  1849),  the  tvvo  strongest  illustrations 
of  his  genius. 

About  this  time  he  became  court-choirmaster  at  Berlin,  there  bringing  out 
Das  Feldlager  in  Schlesien  (1843),  without  much  success  until  the  advent 
of  the  brilliant  Swedish  soprano  Jenny  Lind,  who  for  several  years  was  closely 
connected  with  his  fortunes.  He  also  displayed  power  in  the  music  for  his 
brother’s  tragedy  Struensee  (1846),  and  exerted  his  commanding  influence 
to  revive  Weber’s  Euryanthe  (1845)  and  t0  Sa’n  a hearing  for  Wagner’s 
Rienzi  (1847). 

About  1850,  doubtless  owing  to  the  unremitting  labor  and  anxiety  involved 
in-  his  habits  of  work,  his  health  became  precarious.  But  he  still  continued  to 
produce  at  intervals,  notably  Eetoile  du  Nord  (1854,  Paris)  and  Le  pardon 
de  Ploermel  or  Dinorah  (1859,  Paris),  both  attempts  to  compete  with  French 
writers  of  opera  comique  on  their  own  ground.  Finally  came  L'africaine 
(begun  1838,  developed  during  the  whole  25  years  following,  first  given  1865), 
which  is  dramatically  composite,  though  musically  full  of  interest.  He  wrote 


MEYERBEER 


455 


considerable  other  music,  especially  many  cantatas  and  small  stage-works, 
some  choruses  and  ballades,  and  some  striking  orchestral  overtures  and 
marches,  besides  much  piano  music  (not  published). 

His  personality  offers  much  singularity.  His  mind  was  highly  trained  and 
well  stored.  He  was  a persistent  student  and  experimenter,  subjecting  some 
of  his  works  to  an  exasperating  amount  of  revision.  He  had  intense  artistic 
ambition,  supported  by  a florid  and  grandiose  imagination,  and  much  capacity 
for  flights  of  beauty  and  tragic  power.  Yet  he  was  extraordinarily  susceptible 
to  circumstances  and  suggestions,  so  that  his  manner  was  vacillating,  indeci- 
sive, inconsistent  and  at  times  timid.  He  was  eager  for  showy  effects  and 
unscrupulous  about  how  he  secured  them.  His  over-anxiety  to  capture  his 
audience  and  his  seeming  want  of  assurance  about  his  own  convictions  kept 
him  from  being  a genius  of  the  highest  order,  though  his  power  to  grasp 
grand  conceptions,  to  build  up  impressive  scenes  and  to  handle  the  orchestra 
seemed  to  offer  materials  for  a nobler  achievement  than  he  actually  won. 
But  the  clever  use  of  his  talents  gave  him  for  a time  a commanding  place  in 
the  musical  world,  driving  Rossini  from  his  eminence  and,  with  him,  holding 
back  the  transition  to  Wagner. 

179.  Opera-Singers  and  Librettists.  — With  the  changes  that 
now  began  to  come  over  the  operatic  world  the  artistic  impor- 
tance of  both  vocalists  and  librettists  became  perceptibly  greater. 
To  be  sure,  the  old  tyranny  of  the  singers  was  broken,  so  that 
they  no  longer  dictated  to  the  composer  what  and  how  he 
should  write,  but,  on  the  other  hand,  new  possibilities  of  dra- 
matic and  musical  cooperation  with  the  composer  were  opened. 
The  score  now  became  something  to  be  really  interpreted  and 
portrayed,  and,  while  the  chances  for  vocal  display  were  not 
lessened,  the  average  amount  of  genuine  stage-ability  demanded 
was  decidedly  increased.  Hence  the  greater  operatic  stars  now 
began  to  show  a more  varied  lustre,  involving  a fuller  participa- 
tion in  the  light  and  warmth  of  the  composers  themselves.  Every 
advance  in  the  dramatic  intensity  of  operatic  style  involved 
heavier  demands  upon  the  performers  as  many-sided  artists. 

The  work  of  preparing  texts,  also,  now  acquired  a fresh  dis- 
tinction, since  it  was  becoming  clear  that  mere  hack  work,  with- 
out dramatic  insight  and  poetic  tact,  did  not  supply  the  materials 
for  the  strongest  operatic  effects.  Occasionally  superior  music 
might  triumph  over  the  emptiness  or  foolishness  of  its  text,  but 
normally  the  two  factors  should  work  together  and  be  fused  into 
a real  unity.  Hence  now  a few  writers  of  opera-books  began  to 
stand  out  as  efficient  agents  in  the  growth  of  the  musical  drama 
upon  modern  lines. 


456 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


Of  the  stage-singers  of  the  period  only  a few  distinguished  examples  can 
be  cited,  such  as  the  following : — 

Among  the  great  sopranos  were  from  1795  Angelica  Catalani  (d.  1849), 
who,  after  triumphs  in  Italy,  Portugal  and  England,  in  1814-7  was  head  of 
the  Theatre  Italien  in  Paris,  then  resuming  tours  and  retiring  in  1828;  from 
1803  Pauline  Anna  Milder  (Hauptmann)  (d.  1838),  known  in  Austria  and 
Germany;  from  1804  Teresa  Belloc  (d.  1855),  a favorite  Rossini  interpreter, 
retiring  in  1827;  from  1815  Giuditta  (Negri)  Pasta  (d.  1865),  who  sang  till 
1829  mostly  in  Paris  or  London;  from  1820  Henriette  Sontag  (d.  1854), 
known  in  Germany  and  at  Paris,  who  retired  in  1830,  but  reappeared  in  1848 
and  died  in  Mexico  while  on  a great  American  tour;  from  1821  the  gifted 
artist  Wilhelmine  Schroder  (Devrient)  (d.  i860),  who  worked  almost  wholly 
at  Dresden  in  all  styles  from  Weber  to  Wagner,  retiring  in  1847;  and  from 
1822  till  1835  Nanette  Schechner  (Waagen)  (d.  i860). 

The  one  great  contralto  was  from  1825  Maria  (Garcia)  Malibran  (d. 
1836),  who  made  a fabulous  fortune  in  London,  America,  Paris  and  Italy,  and 
died  suddenly  at  only  28. 

The  greater  tenors  were  from  about  1790  Manoel  del  Popolo  Vicente  Garcia 
(d.  1832),  who,  after  singing  and  writing  operettas  in  Spain  and  at  Paris,  in 
1 8 1 1 —6  studied  in  Italy,  oscillated  between  London  and  Paris,  introduced 
Italian  opera  into  the  United  States  and  Mexico  in  1825-9,  became  a famous 
teacher  and  produced  in  all  about  50  operas;  from  1793  till  1829  Gaetano 
Crivelli  (d.  1836);  from  1796  the  English  John  Braham  (d.  1856),  also  a 
composer  of  songs  and  stage-pieces;  from  about  1795  Niccolb  Tacchinardi 
(d.  1859),  till  1831  known  chiefly  at  Florence  and  Paris;  from  1797  Dome- 
nico Ronconi  (d.  1839),  who  in  1825  settled  as  a teacher  at  Milan;  from  1811 
Karl  Adam  Bader  (d.  1870),  a specialist  in  Spontini’s  works  at  Berlin  ; from 
1814  the  enormously  successful  Giovanni  Battista  Rubini  (d.  1854);  and 
from  1821  the  Parisian  Adolphe  Nourrit  (d.  1839,  suicide). 

The  more  noted  basses  were  from  1810  Christian  Wilhelm  Fischer  (d. 
1 859),  working  mostly  at  Dresden  and  Leipsic;  from  1812  the  remarkable 
Luigi  Lablache  (d.  1858),  a foremost  artist  for  40  years;  from  1813  Nicolas 
Prosper  Levasseur  of  Paris  (d.  1871)  ; and  from  1818  till  1859  Antonio 
Tamburini  (d.  1876),  a universal  favorite. 

The  two  greatest  writers  of  librettos  were  Gaetano  Rossi  (d.  1855),  who 
worked  long  at  Venice,  writing  over  100  opera-texts,  including  those  of 
Rossini’s  Tancredi  and  Semir amide,  of  Meyerbeer’s  II  crociato , of  Donizetti’s 
Linda  di  Chamounix  and  of  Mercadante’s  II  giuramento ; and  Eugene  Scribe 
(d.  1861),  who  devoted  his  talents  to  the  upbuilding  of  the  French  opdra 
comique,  also  preparing  over  100  texts,  of  which  brilliant  examples  were 
those  of  Boieldieu’s  La  dame  blanche,  Auber’s  Masaniello , Fra  Diavolo,  Les 
diamants  de  la  couronne  and  many  others,  Halevy’s  Manon  Lescaut  and 
La  juive , Meyerbeer’s  Robert  le  Diable , Les  Huguenots,  Le  Pr ophite,  Vetoile 
du  Alord  and  Lafricaine,  and  Verdi’s  Les  vlpres  siciliennes  — besides  writ- 
ing a number  of  novels. 


CHAPTER  XXVII 

INSTRUMENTAL  VIRTUOSITY 


180.  Pianism  and  Pianists. — After  the  preparatory  steps 
taken  in  the  previous  period  (see  secs.  160-162)  and  with  the 
eminent  keyboard  masters  then  appearing  still  active,  it  is  not 
surprising  that  the  19th  century  opened  with  a brilliant  advance 
in  pianism.  Chief  among  the  older  pianists  who  were  still  at 
work  were  Beethoven,  Clementi,  Hummel,  and  Cramer.  From 
the  point  of  view  of  creation,  the  greatness  of  Beethoven 
eclipsed  all  other  factors,  his  concertos  and  sonatas,  indeed, 
fully  holding  their  eminence  till  the  present  time.  But,  on  the 
other  hand,  other  trains  of  influence,  originating  with  many-sided 
geniuses  like  Weber  and  Schubert,  or  with  specialists  in  playing 
the  piano  or  writing  for  it,  like  Field,  Kalkbrenner,  Moscheles, 
Czerny  and  many  others,  deserve  to  be  remembered  for  their 
intrinsic  value  or  their  historic  consequences. 

All  but  the  earliest  of  Beethoven’s  piano-works  clearly  belong  to  the 
new  period,  even  though  a few  of  them  were  completed  before  1800.  His 
piano  style  was  much  affected  by  his  command  of  the  color  and  the  details 
of  orchestration.  Yet  at  the  same  time  it  was  truly  pianistic,  with  a 
thorough  perception  of  the  capacities  and  limitations  of  the  instrument. 
He  was  fully  equipped  as  a virtuoso  and  his  keyboard  writing  made  large 
technical  demands,  but  the  urgency  of  his  constructive  ideas  and  of  his 
impetuous  and  glowing  sentiment  pushed  the  essential  materials  always 
into  the  foreground.  Technique  and  its  triumphs  were  for  him  means  to 
an  artistic  end,  not  ends  in  themselves.  This  earnestness  of  effort,  com- 
bined with  his  originality  of  conception,  placed  his  works  for  the  piano  in 
a class  by  themselves.  So  it  is  not  strange  that  he  can  hardly  be  said  to 
have  founded  a school  of  piano  music.  It  is  true  that  Schubert  caught 
something  of  his  ideality  and  copied  some  of  his  expressions,  and  that 
pupils  like  Ries  and  Czerny  sought  devotedly  to  perpetuate  his  manner. 
But  his  influence  was  general  rather  than  special,  setting  up  a new  ideal 
for  all  musical  art  rather  than  precise  models  of  style. 

The  historic  eminence  of  Weber  and  Schubert  rests  mainly  upon  other 
works  than  those  for  the  piano,  though  both  wrote  fruitfully  for  it.  They 
resembled  Beethoven  in  that  they  used  the  piano  as  but  one  medium  for 
expressing  what  they  were  also  putting  forth  otherwise.  Weber  had  the 

457 


458 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


instinct  of  a finished  executant  and  the  greater  dramatic  impulse,  while 
Schubert  had  the  higher  lyric  inspiration  and  the  nicer  sense  of  form. 
Neither  of  these  became  a dominating  force  in  pianistic  development. 
This  is  still  more  true  of  Meyerbeer,  the  remaining  great  pianist  among 
the  masters  already  mentioned. 

In  the  rapidly  widening  circle  of  specialists  the  two  * schools  ' 
of  Mozart  and  of  Clementi  can  still  be  traced,  though  with 
steadily  lessening  distinctness.  The  chief  exponent  of  the 
former  was  Hummel,  of  the  latter,  Clementi  himself.  As  they 
drew  together,  new  tendencies  declared  themselves.  One  of 
these,  led  by  the  English  Field  and  furthered  by  the  Bohemian 
Moscheles,  pointed  toward  the  elegance  of  Mendelssohn  and,  to 
a less  degree,  toward  the  sentimentality  of  Chopin.  Another, 
fostered  by  the  attention  given  by  teachers  and  virtuosi  to 
technique,  aimed  more  at  astounding  brilliance  of  superficial 
effect  than  at  solidity  of  intrinsic  contents.  To  this  latter  tend- 
ency the  rising  French  school  of  pianists,  in  which  Kalkbrenner 
was  conspicuous,  contributed  more  and  more. 

In  referring  to  the  leading  pianistic  figures  of  the  time,  it  is  convenient  to 
draw  a rough  distinction  between  the  virtuosi  and  the  pedagogues,  though 
most  of  the  important  artists  were  both. 

To  the  list  of  virtuosi  already  given  (secs.  161-162)  these  may  be  added : — 

Francesco  Pollini  (d.  1846),  born  in  Illyria,  a pupil  of  Mozart  and  Zingarelli, 
became  noted  before  1790  as  a keyboard  performer,  uniting  qualities  from 
both  Viennese  and  English  schools,  and  in  brilliance  ranking  with  the  best. 
From  1809  he  taught  in  the  new  Milan  conservatory.  He  is  known  by  many 
piano-works,  including  some  (from  1820)  in  which  he  used  the  novel  device 
of  three  staffs,  so  as  to  indicate  a cantabile  melody  with  florid  accompaniment. 
He  also  wrote  a method  (c.  1810),  besides  operas  (from  1798),  a Stabat  Mater, 
cantatas  and  songs.  He  was  one  of  the  forerunners  of  the  ‘ brilliant 1 school. 

John  Field  (d.  1837)  was  born  at  Dublin  in  1782  of  a musical  family  and 
was  severely  drilled  in  music  as  a child.  At  12,  when  taken  to  London,  he 
was  employed  by  Clementi  for  ten  years  as  an  exhibitor  of  pianos  — an  uncouth 
and  offish  youth,  but  a marvelous  performer,  able  to  impress  even  Parisian 
critics  (1802)  by  his  treatment  of  Bach’s  fugues.  In  1804  Clementi  took  him 
to  Russia,  where  he  remained,  first  at  St.  Petersburg  and  from  1823  at  Moscow, 
enjoying  immense  success  as  player  and  teacher.  In  1832-4  he  visited  Lon- 
don and  toured  through  France  and  Italy,  where  his  health  broke  down. 
Russian  admirers  came  to  his  help  and  took  him  back,  by  way  of  Vienna,  to 
Moscow,  where  he  died.  His  qualities  as  a player  are  evinced  by  his  works, 
which  include  7 concertos,  several  sonatas,  2 fantasias,  many  airs,  rondos,  etc., 
and  18  ‘nocturnes.’  Especially  in  these  last  appear  his  gifts  in  delicate  sen- 
timent and  the  graceful  development  of  melodic  material,  foreshadowing  the 
intimate  and  passionate  keyboard  lyrics  of  the  Chopinesque  order. 


IMPORTANT  PIANISTS 


459 


Ferdinand  Ries  (d.  1838)  was  born  at  Bonn,  the  son  of  Franz  Ries  the 
violinist,  and  studied  at  Munich  with  Winter  and  at  Vienna  with  Beethoven 
and  Albrechtsberger.  After  four  years  of  destitution  at  Paris  and  Vienna,  he 
won  success  as  a player  at  Cassel,  Stockholm,  St.  Petersburg  and  (from  1813) 
London,  where  he  remained  till  1824  in  favor  as  player,  composer  and  teacher. 
Retiring  then  to  his  home  near  Bonn  and  from  1830  living  at  Frankfort,  he 
conducted  eight  of  the  Lower  Rhine  Festivals  (from  1825),  in  1834-6  was 
town-musician  at  Aix-la-Chapelle,  and  had  just  succeeded  Schelble  as  head  of 
the  Cacilienverein  at  Frankfort  when  he  died.  He  was  noted  for  a lifelong 
devotion  to  Beethoven,  bearing  with  his  violent  peculiarities,  laboring  assidu- 
ously to  make  his  works  known  and  aiming  to  imitate  his  style.  His  genius 
was  not  powerful  enough  to  make  him  more  than  a worthy  disciple.  Among 
his  over  200  works  are  9 concertos,  about  50  able  sonatas,  many  shorter  pieces, 
6 excellent  symphonies,  4 overtures,  many  chamber  works,  3 operas,  including 
Die  Rauberbraut  (1828),  and  2 oratorios.  With  Wegeler  he  prepared  invalu- 
able reminiscences  of  Beethoven  (1838). 

Friedrich  Kalkbrenner  (d.  1849)  was  born  in  1788,  the  son  of  Christian 
Kalkbrenner  (d.  1806),  an  able  Jewish  musician,  who  from  1799  was  chorus- 
master  at  the  Paris  Opera.  He  was  taught  by  Adam  and  Catel,  and  at  Vienna 
by  Clementi  and  Albrechtsberger.  I n 1 805-6  he  toured  in  Germany  and  F ranee 
with  success,  and  settled  at  Paris  as  a leading  teacher,  being  helpfully  influenced 
by  Dussek.  From  1814  he  worked  with  similar  success  in  London,  where 
from  1818  he  was  much  interested  in  Logier’s  ‘ chiroplast.’  After  a German  tour 
he  returned  to  Paris  in  1824,  became  one  of  the  firm  of  Pleyel  & Cie.  and  re- 
sumed his  place  as  ”a  teacher.  His  technique  was  exceedingly  perfect,  in- 
cluding special  dexterity  with  the  left  hand,  with  the  wrist  in  octave-playing 
and  with  the  pedals,  and  his  tone  was  broad  and  noble.  His  conceit  was  ex- 
cessive, both  as  to  his  playing  and  his  teaching,  as  was  shown  in  his  offer  to 
instruct  Chopin  in  1831.  He  wrote  fluent  concertos,  sonatas,  chamber  works 
and  small  pieces,  including  excellent  etudes;  also  a method  (1830)  and  a 
work  on  harmony  (1849). 

Ignaz  Moscheles  (d.  1870)  was  a Bohemian,  born  in  1794  of  Jewish  parents. 
He  was  early  trained  at  Prague  by  Dionys  Weber,  and  from  1808  at  Vienna  by 
Salieri  and  Albrechtsberger.  He  was  intimate  with  Beethoven  and  competed 
with  Meyerbeer  and  Hummel.  From  about  1815  his  place  as  a foremost  con- 
cert-pianist was  fully  won,  and  he  toured  brilliantly  in  Germany,  France  and 
Holland.  From  1822  he  was  mostly  in  London,  where  he  had  increasing  re- 
nown. In  1824  he  gave  lessons  to  Mendelssohn  at  Berlin  and  later  was  in- 
timate with  him  at  London.  In  1846  he  joined  Mendelssohn  in  the  Leipsic 
conservatory,  where  he  long  continued  one  of  the  ablest  teachers.  His  life 
and  influence  therefore  reached  over  the  whole  of  the  half-century  from  1815. 
As  a player  he  was  precise,  rhythmically  exact,  agile  and  vigorous,  with  great 
capacity  for  varied  interpretation  and  original  improvising.  His  predilection 
for  strong  construction  on  conservative  lines  kept  him  from  fully  appreciating 
Chopin.  His  many  works,  all  for  the  piano  solo  or  with  other  instruments, 
including  7 concertos,  several  sonatas  and  fine  studies,  have  nobility  and 
graceful  sentiment,  united  with  sound  scholarship.  Altogether,  he  occupies  a 
larger  historic  place  than  is  sometimes  realized. 


460 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


Other  famous  players  were  Ludwig  Berger  (d.  1839),  pupil  of  Giirrlich 
and  Clementi  and  an  admirer  of  Field,  who  from  1812  gave  concerts  at  Stock- 
holm and  London  and  from  1815  lived  at  Berlin,  where  he  trained  many 
able  pupils,  was  active  in  founding  a second  Liedertafel  and  wrote  admirable 
piano  and  vocal  works,  of  which  his  dtudes  and  others  are  still  valued ; the 
Russian  Maria  (Wolowska)  Szymanowska  (d.  1832),  a pupil  of  Field,  who  from 
1815  lived  at  Warsaw,  touring  throughout  Europe,  elicited  fulsome  admiration 
from  Goethe,  and  left  some  studies,  mazurkas,  etc. ; Franz  Schoberlechner  (d. 
1843),  trained  by  Hummel  and  Forster,  who  made  his  ddbut  at  10  (1807), 
toured  in  Italy  in  1814,  becoming  choirmaster  at  Lucca  and  taking  up  opera  and 
church  music,  from  1823  lived  mostly  at  St.  Petersburg,  where  he  married  a 
celebrated  soprano,  and  finally  retired  to  Florence  — compositions  brilliant, 
but  shallow  ; Henri  Bertini  (d.  1876),  who  was  taught  in  the  Clementi  tradi- 
tion, began  touring  at  12  (1810),  lived  for  a time  in  England,  from  1821  worked 
at  Paris  as  teacher  and  composer,  exerting  a wholesome  influence  against  the 
showy  style,  and  left  some  200  works  for  piano  and  chamber  ensembles,  in- 
cluding classical  etudes;  and  Charles  Mayer  (d.  1862),  trained  by  Field, 
whose  style  he  copied,  and  living  from  1814  at  Paris,  from  1819  at  St.  Peters- 
burg and  from  1846  at  Dresden  — a refined  and  effective  player,  an  industrious 
teacher  and  a valuable  contributor  to  piano  literature. 

Among  those  whose  significance  was  greatest  as  teachers  the  following 
may  be  emphasized  : — 

Louis  Barthelemy  Pradher  [Pradere]  (d.  1834),  a pupil  of  Gobert  and  Ber- 
ton,  at  21  (1802)  became  professor  in  the  Conservatoire,  continuing  till  1827, 
when  he  removed  to  Toulouse  and  became  head  of  a school  there.  He  was 
helpful  in  lifting  the  French  school  into  prominence,  and  many  of  his  pupils 
were  later  famous,  especially  Herz.  He  wrote  a concerto,  several  sonatas  and 
other  piano  works,  7 light  operas  (1804-23)  and  many  songs. 

Pierre  Joseph  Guillaume  Zimmerman  (d.  1853),  a pupil  of  Boieldieu,  Rey, 
Catel  and  Cherubini  at  the  same  time  as  Pradher  and  Kalkbrenner,  at  26  (1 81 1) 
began  to  teach  at  the  Conservatoire  and  from  1816  was  the  head  of  the  piano 
department.  Although  an  accomplished  player  and  composer,  he  devoted 
himself  to  the  faithful  teaching  of  an  enormous  list  of  pupils.  He  wrote  2 
concertos,  24  etudes,  many  dances  and  smaller  pieces,  2 operas,  many  songs 
and  an  elaborate  Encycloptdie  du  pianiste  (3  parts) . 

Friedrich  Wieck  (d.  1873),  though  showing  musical  talent  as  a boy,  was  first 
educated  for  the  Lutheran  ministry  at  Wittenberg,  became  a private  tutor  near 
Querfurt,  was  musically  intimate  with  A.  A.  Bargiel,  a Berlin  teacher,  set  up 
at  Leipsic  a piano-factory  and  a circulating  library,  and  finally,  when  nearly  35 
years  old,  adopted  piano-teaching  as  a life-work,  at  first  upon  Logier’s  system, 
but  soon  according  to  his  own  ideas,  from  about  1820  at  Leipsic  and  after  1840 
at  Dresden,  where  he  also  taught  singing.  He  developed  a remarkable  peda- 
gogical system  and  trained  many  great  pupils,  among  whom  were  his  noted 
daughters  Clara  (Mme.  Schumann)  and  Marie.  Mendelssohn  vainly  sought 
him  for  the  Leipsic  conservatory  in  1846.  His  house  at  Dresden  was  a great 
resort  for  musicians.  He  composed  little,  principally  piano-studies. 

Aloys  Schmitt  (d.  1866)  was  a virtuoso  at  14  (1802)  and  then  a pupil  of 
Andrd.  From  1816  he  worked  at  Frankfort,  except  for  sojourns  at  Berlin 


IMPORTANT  PIANISTS 


461 


and  Hanover  (1825-9).  He  was  most  successful  as  teacher  and  composer, 
writing  4 concertos,  many  sonatas,  rhapsodies,  variations,  studies,  chamber 
and  orchestral  music,  besides  4 operas,  2 oratorios  and  church  music.  His 
style  was  dry,  but  solid. 

Karl  Czerny  (d.  1857),  born  at  Vienna  in  1791,  was  trained  by  his  father 
and  by  Beethoven  (in  1800-3),  besides  closely  studying  the  styles  of  Hummel 
and  Clementi.  From  before  1810  he  won  renown  as  a teacher  at  Vienna, 
where  he  remained  throughout  his  life,  exerting  a valuable  and  lasting  influence. 
He  was  astonishingly  productive,  writing  about  1000  works  in  literally  every 
class  except  opera.  The  most  valued  are  those  for  teaching  purposes,  especially 
Die  Schule  der  Gelaufigkeit , Die  Schule  des  Legato  und  Staccato,  etc.,  which  to- 
gether form  a vast  instructive  apparatus.  He  was  fertile  in  ‘ arrangements  ’ of 
orchestral  works,  operas  and  oratorios,  being  encouraged  to  such  work  by 
Beethoven’s  comments  on  his  piano  version  of  Fidelio  (1805).  He  also  pub- 
lished a brief  history  (1851)  and  an  autobiography. 

Lesser  names  include  Anton  Halm  (d.  1872),  from  18  n working  at  Vienna, 
where  he  was  one  of  Beethoven’s  circle,  with  excellent  studies,  sonatas,  piano- 
trios,  other  chamber  music  and  a mass;  Heinrich  Birnbach  (d.  1879),  from 
1814  at  Breslau  and  from  1821  at  Berlin,  with  piano  and  orchestral  works  and 
a manual  on  composition  (1845)  ? and  Joseph  Christoph  Kessler  [Kotzler] 
(d.  1872),  from  1820  mostly  at  Lemberg  and  Vienna,  with  many  difficult,  but 
useful,  studies,  etc. 

Johann  Wenzel  Tomaschek  (d.  1850)  occupies  a unique  position,  though 
not  as  well  known  as  he  merits.  He  was  born  in  1774  at  Skuc  (40  m.  east  of 
Prague),  was  a choirboy  at  Chrudim  and  Iglau,  from  1790  studied  law  at 
Prague,  but  with  diligent  pursuit  of  music  as  well,  and  in  1799  entered  the 
service  of  Count  Bouquoy  as  composer.  He  soon  became  the  leading  musician 
of  Prague,  recognized  as  a superior  player,  training  many  fine  pupils  and 
developing  extraordinary  power  as  a composer.  In  1798  he  received  a memo- 
rable impetus  from  hearing  Beethoven,  and  was  later  favored  by  the  latter’s 
intimacy.  His  over  100  published  works  include  a concerto,  5 sonatas,  36 
eclogues,  6 rhapsodies,  3 ditirambi,  6 allegri  capricciosi,  some  orchestral  and 
chamber  works,  masses  and  church  works,  many  songs,  cantatas  and  ballads  in 
Bohemian  and  German,  and  3 operas,  as  Seraphim  (18 11).  His  style  was 
remarkably  elaborate,  finished  and  able,  placing  him  close  to  Beethoven  him- 
self. Schumann  is  said  to  have  been  considerably  influenced  by  it.  His  auto- 
biography (1845)  appeared  in  the  periodical  Libussa. 

181.  Violinism  and  Violinists.  — Music  for  the  violin  and  its 
relatives  at  this  period  shows  the  same  interesting  interplay  be- 
tween technical  and  artistic  impulses  as  music  for  the  piano.  ' 
On  the  one  hand,  we  have  the  specialist’s  eagerness  to  extract 
novel  effects  from  his  intrument  and  make  a popular  sensation 
with  it.  On  the  other,  is  the  query  of  the  broader  musician  as 
to  how  through  it  the  range,  intensity  and  warmth  of  expression 
may  be  augmented,  especially  in  applying  the  general  ideas  of 


462 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


large  construction  elsewhere  accepted.  But  in  the  violin  family 
there  was  no  such  advance  in  the  instruments  themselves  as  in 
the  case  of  the  piano.  The  one  decided  mechanical  gain  was 
the  perfecting  of  the  bow  by  Tourte  (see  sec.  149).  The  field 
for  violin  music,  however,  was  constantly  broadened  by  the  rise 
of  interest  in  the  orchestral  and  chamber  concert  as  a social 
institution. 

The  significant  link  between  the  older  and  newer  violinism 
was  the  veteran  Viotti  (see  sec.  149),  whose  style  rested  upon 
the  Corelli  tradition,  and  whose  long  artistic  life  brought  him 
into  touch  with  both  the  Mozart  and  the  Beethoven  periods. 
He  not  only  clung  to  the  broad  style  of  playing,  but  is  notable 
as  the  one  to  apply  to  the  violin-concerto  the  full  system  of 
sonata-form  and  the  new  resources  of  orchestration.  Through 
his  pupils  and  his  leadership  of  the  Paris  Opera  he  exerted  a 
large  influence  upon  the  brilliant  and  energetic  French  group  of 
players.  Valuable  progress  was  still  more  stimulated  by  the 
genius  of  Spohr,  who  held  the  purest  technical  traditions  with  a 
greater  general  musicianship,  and  who  fully  maintained  the 
excellence  of  the  Mannheim  and  other  German  groups.  An- 
other line  of  development  was  strikingly  illustrated  by  Paganini, 
the  whimsical,  but  immensely  gifted  ‘wizard  of  the  bow.’  He 
represented  a growing  class  of  players  whose  supreme  aim  was 
to  astonish  and  emotionalize  audiences.  This  aim  is  always 
liable  to  descend  into  charlatanism,  but  often  has  value  in  ad- 
vancing the  standards  of  dexterity  and  the  apparatus  of  effect. 

Among  the  older  violinists  still  at  work  about  1800  and  afterward,  besides 
Viotti  (d.  1824),  Kreutzer  (d.  1831)  and  others  already  mentioned,  were 
Isidore  Berthaume  (d.  1802),  a Parisian  who  when  a boy  (1761)  appeared  at 
the  Concerts  spirituels,  later  (1783)  became  their  conductor  and  went  to 
Russia  in  1791  ; Pierre  Lahoussaye  (d.  1818),  from  1779  also  active  at  Paris, 
finally  professor  in  the  Conservatoire  ; the  brothers  Johann  Friedrich  Eck  (d. 
1809?)  and  Franz  Eck  (d.  1804),  both  associated  chiefly  with  Munich  ; and 
Alessandro  Rolla  (d.  1841),  from  1782  at  Parma  and  from  1802  a well-known 
conductor  and  teacher  at  Milan. 

Andreas  Romberg  (d.  1821),  though  not  specially  influential,  deserves  men- 
tion for  his  industrious  activity.  Born  in  1767,  at  7 he  was  heard  in  public 
and  joined  his  cousin  Bernhard  (see  below)  in  varied  travel  until  after  1800. 
From  1795  he  knew  Haydn  and  Beethoven  at  Vienna.  From  1801  he  taught 
at  Hamburg  and  in  1815  succeeded  Spohr  at  Gotha.  Besides  stage-works 
(from  1790),  excellent  secular  choral  pieces,  like  Das  Lied  von  der  Glocke  and 
other  poems  by  Schiller,  and  much  sacred  music,  he  wrote  10  symphonies,  over 


IMPORTANT  VIOLINISTS  463 

20  violin-concertos,  over  30  quartets  and  many  other  solo  and  chamber  works 
— all  in  a style  reminiscent  of  Mozart. 

Pierre  Rode  (d.  1830),  born  at  Bordeaux  in  1774,  was  there  a pupil  of 
Fauvel  and  from  1788  at  Paris  of  Viotti,  appearing  as  a player  in  1790.  From 
1794  he  toured  in  Holland,  Germany,  England  and  Spain  (where  he  met 
Boccherini),  from  1800  was  employed  by  Napoleon  and  from  1803  (with 
Boieldieu)  by  Alexander  I.  at  St.  Petersburg,  from  1808  was  again  at  Paris, 
from  1 81 1 toured  in  Germany  and  Austria  (Beethoven  writing  a sonata  for  him 
in  1812),  and,  after  a sojourn  at  Berlin,  retired  to  Bordeaux.  From  1795  he 
was  on  the  staff  of  the  Conservatoire.  His  early  playing  was  of  the  finest 
quality,  broad,  sympathetic  and  full  of  energy  (so  that  Spohr,  for  instance, 
regarded  it  as  ideal),  but  from  about  1810  he  gradually  lost  his  certainty  and 
power,  and  in  1828  his  life  was  shortened  by  a fiasco  at  Paris.  His  writing  was 
for  the  violin  exclusively  — 13  concertos,  over  20  quartets,  about  25  duos, 
many  variations,  24  famous  caprices,  12  etudes  and  a method  (with  Baillot 
and  Kreutzer).  He  trained  a few  good  pupils. 

Francois  Baillot  (d.  1842)  was  born  near  Paris  in  1771,  studied  from  1780 
with  Sainte-Marie  and  from  1783  at  Rome  with  Pollani,  in  1791  returned  to 
Paris  and  in  1795  adopted  music  as  a career.  His  full  powers  immediately 
awoke,  so  that  he  became  professor  at  the  Conservatoire,  undertaking  hard 
theoretical  studies  as  well.  In  1805-8  he  toured  in  Russia,  in  1815-6  in  the 
Low  Countries  and  England,  and  in  1833  in  Switzerland  and  Italy.  In 
1802-5  he  vvas  m Napoleon’s  orchestra,  from  1814  organized  concerts  for 
chamber  music,  in  1821-31  was  concertmaster  at  the  Opera  and  from  1825 
was  also  in  the  court-orchestra.  He  was  remarkable  both  as  a soloist  and  in 
ensemble,  retaining  his  mastery  to  the  end.  He  and  Rode,  though  rivals, 
were  close  friends,  being  the  strongest  representatives  of  the  classical  style  in 
France.  Like  Rode,  he  wrote  only  for  the  violin  — 9 concertos,  3 quartets, 
15  trios,  6 duos,  about  30  variations,  nearly  40  etudes,  etc.,  besides  a method 
(with  Rode  and  Kreutzer),  an  excellent  manual,  L'art  du  violon  (1834),  and 
essays  on  Gretry  (1814)  and  Viotti  (1825).  He  had  many  fine  pupils. 

Charles  Philippe  Lafont  (d.  1839)  was  ^rst  trained  by  Berthaume  and  at 
11  (1792)  toured  in  Germany.  After  further  study  with  Kreutzer  and  Rode, 
from  1801  he  toured  through  northern  Europe,  in  1808  succeeded  Rode  at 
St.  Petersburg,  from  1815  was  court -violinist  at  Paris,  and  from  1831  toured 
with  the  pianist  Herz.  He  was  noted  for  precision  and  finish,  but  lacked 
sentiment  and  breadth  of  interest.  He  wrote  7 concertos,  many  fantasias, 
variations  and  lesser  pieces,  with  about  200  songs  and  2 operettas. 

Niccolb  Paganini  (d.  1840)  stands  alone,  representing  no  particular  school. 
He  was  born  in  1782  at  Genoa  of  poor  parents,  who,  however,  gave  him  all 
possible  opportunity.  At  Genoa  he  was  taught  by  Servetto  and  Costa,  at 
Parma  by  Rolla  and  Ghiretti.  In  1795  he  began  public  playing,  for  which  he 
practised  inordinately.  At  16  he  ran  away,  toured  through  northern  Italy 
and  indulged  in  much  dissipation,  especially  gambling,  to  which  he  was  a 
lifelong  devotee.  From  1801  he  spent  much  time  upon  the  guitar,  but  in 
1804  returned  to  Genoa  and  resumed  prodigious  violin-study,  with  some  com- 
posing. In  1805  began  his  triumph  as  an  unparalleled  virtuoso,  which  grew  in 
Italy  till  1828,  when  he  extended  it  to  Vienna,  Berlin,  Paris  and  London 


464 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


(1831-3),  with  other  cities  on  the  way.  The  results  of  these  thirty  years 
amply  fed  his  passion  for  applause  and  money.  His  remaining  years  were 
spent  mostly  at  Paris  or  at  Parma.  In  1836  he  engaged  in  a disastrous 
speculation  at  Paris.  His  death  was  hastened  by  years  of  wild  excitement 
and  sensual  indulgence.  His  personal  appearance  was  bizarre,  his  habits 
eccentric,  his  temperament  hot  and  erratic,  his  character  ignoble  or  unbalanced. 
Popular  rumor  made  him  the  child  of  the  Evil  One,  so  uncanny  were  his  ways 
and  so  marvelous  his  performances.  He  mystified  his  hearers  by  using  strange 
tunings,  was  eager  to  invent  unheard-of  effects  and  made  himself  absolute 
master  of  detailed  technique.  But  he  was  more  than  clever.  He  had  warmth 
and  pathos  in  slow  playing  and  matchless  brilliance  in  rapid  work,  with  a 
wonderful  beauty  of  tone.  He  probably  has  not  been  surpassed  in  double- 
stopping, harmonics,  left-hand  pizzicati , and  the  use  of  the  G-string  alone. 
But  he  was  not  always  a sympathetic  interpreter  outside  his  own  field  nor 
successful  in  ensemble.  His  lack  of  general  musicianship  and  of  artistic 
purpose  is  shown  in  his  limited  work  as  composer.  He  published  only  24 
capriccios,  12  sonatas  and  3 quartets;  later  were  added  2 concertos,  a sonata, 
several  sets  of  variations  and  the  Moto  perpetuo.  His  enormous  dclat  roused 
a host  of  imitators  and  turned  the  whole  current  of  violin  style  toward 
brilliance  of  effect,  without  the  genius  that  in  his  case  gave  distinction. 

Giovanni  Battista  Polledro  (d.  1853),  born  near  Turin,  at  15  (1796)  studied 
there  with  Pugnani,  advancing  at  once  into  notice.  During  the  next  fifteen 
years  he  toured  throughout  Europe,  with  considerable  residences  at  various 
cities  (as  five  years  at  Moscow).  From  1814  he  was  concertmaster  at  Dres- 
den, and  from  1824  royal  conductor  at  Turin.  In  1812  he  met  Beethoven 
at  Carlsbad.  His  style  was  a fine  example  of  the  large  and  solid  method  of  the 
older  schools,  uniting  dexterity  with  feeling.  He  wrote  2 concertos,  many 
duos,  trios,  studies  and  smaller  works,  a symphony,  a mass,  etc. 

Ludwig  Spohr  (d.  1859)  holds  a high  place  for  his  long  and  useful  career 
as  violinist  and  composer.  He  was  born  in  1784  at  Brunswick,  both  parents 
being  musical.  Among  his  early  teachers  were  the  organist  Hartung,  from 
whom  came  his  only  formal  training  in  composition,  and  Maucourt,  the  court- 
violinist.  He  was  a methodical  student,  and  at  14  won  some  notice  by  a con- 
certo. Soon  he  secured  the  favor  of  the  Duke  and  was  given  a place  in  the 
court-orchestra.  His  patron  in  1802  entrusted  him  to  Franz  Eck,  with  whom 
he  traveled  via  Hamburg  and  Strelitz  to  St.  Petersburg,  studying  assiduously 
and  composing.  In  1803  he  heard  Rode,  whom  he  took  as  a model,  and  in 
1804  he  toured  with  great  success  to  Berlin  (where  he  played  with  the  young 
Meyerbeer),  Leipsic  and  Dresden.  From  1805  he  was  concertmaster  at 
Gotha,  where  he  married  the  harpist  Dorette  Scheidler  (d.  1834),  with  whom 
he  made  tours.  In  1810  he  conducted  the  first  German  festival  at  Franken- 
hausen.  From  1812  he  was  opera-conductor  at  Vienna,  where  he  knew 
Beethoven,  though  without  full  appreciation.  In  1815  he  visited  Italy,  meet- 
ing Rossini  and  playing  with  Paganini  at  Rome.  From  1817  he  was  opera- 
director  at  Frankfort.  In  1820  he  paid  his  first  visit  to  England  and  also  to 
Paris.  After  a brief  residence  at  Dresden,  where  he  was  intimate  with  Weber, 
in  1822,  on  Weber’s  nomination,  he  became  court-choirmaster  at  Cassel, 
where  he  remained  active  for  35  years,  achieving  his  final  reputation  and 


IMPORTANT  VIOLINISTS 


465 


exerting  valuable  influence.  He  was  a friend  of  Mendelssohn  and,  rather 
curiously,  an  early  appreciator  of  Wagner.  He  repeatedly  visited  England, 
where  he  was  greatly  admired,  and  often  conducted  German  festivals.  His 
last  appearance  was  as  conductor  at  Prague  in  1858. 

His  high  rank  as  a violinist  is  generally  acknowledged.  He  cast  his 
weight  on  the  side  of  solid  technique  and  sterling  artistic  value,  usefully 
offsetting  the  sensational  drift  of  the  day.  He  was  a fine  quartet-player  as  well 
as  soloist,  and  a superior  conductor.  His  ability  as  a teacher  was  attested 
by  numerous  pupils.  His  work  as  composer  was  many-sided,  evincing  broad 
culture,  but  with  some  limitations.  His  style  was  formed  on  strictly  classical 
lines,  Mozart  being  his  early  enthusiasm.  But  he  was  intellectually  romantic, 
and  is  akin  to  Schubert  and  Mendelssohn  in  the  fusion  of  formal  refinement 
with  imagination.  He  was  somewhat  strong  as  a contrapuntist  and  an 
original  student  of  orchestration.  Yet  all  through  his  work  ran  certain 
mannerisms,  the  most  conspicuous  being  an  excessive  use  of  chromatic  melody 
and  harmony. 

His  compositions  number  about  200,  including  (a)  9 symphonies,  8 over- 
tures, 15  standard  violin-concertos,  a quartet-concerto  and  other  complex 
works,  a great  number  of  chamber  works,  such  as  over  30  quartets,  quintets, 
etc.,  and  3 sonatas  for  harp  and  violin  ; (b)  10  operas  (see  sec.  172)  ; ( c ) 4 

oratorios,  of  which  Die  letzten  Dinge  (1826)  and  Des  Heilands  letzte  Stunden 
( r 835)  [known  in  English  as  The  Last  Judgment  and  Calvary ] are  the 
best,  a patriotic  cantata,  a mass  and  other  sacred  music;  ( d ) a famous 
Violinschule  (1831,  3 parts).  His  autobiography  (1 860-1)  is  a notable  treasury 
of  reminiscences,  as  well  as  a revelation  of  his  upright  and  earnest  character. 

Joseph  Mayseder  (d.  1863),  a Viennese,  pupil  of  Wranitzky,  at  11  (1800) 
gave  his  first  concert,  joined  Schuppanzigh’s  quartet,  from  1816  was  in  the 
court-band,  from  1820  soloist  at  the  court-theatre  and  from  1835  imperial 
violinist,  receiving  many  unusual  honors.  Between  1815  and  ’3 7 he  was 
heard  in  concert  at  Vienna,  but  made  no  public  tours.  He  was  intimate  with 
Beethoven  and  admired  by  Paganini.  The  beauty  of  his  tone  was  noted  and 
as  a teacher  he  had  much  repute.  He  wrote  over  60  able  works,  including  3 
concertos,  2 concertinos,  3 quintets,  7 quartets,  etc. 

Joseph  Bohm  (d.  1876),  born  at  Pesth,  trained  by  his  father  and  later  by 
Rode,  at  8 (1803)  toured  in  Poland  and  Russia,  in  1815  came  to  Vienna  and, 
after  a sojourn  in  Italy,  from  1819  for  30  years  taught  at  the  Vienna  conserva- 
tory with  distinguished  success.  He  played  in  the  court-orchestra  in  1821-68. 
He  excelled  his  contemporary  Mayseder  in  tone  and  general  style,  but  his 
works  were  few  and  slight. 

Karl  Joseph  Lipinski  (d.  1861),  born  in  Poland,  was  mostly  self-trained. 
From  1810  he  was  conductor  at  Lemberg,  from  1814  studied  at  Vienna,  and 
in  1817-8  was  intimate  with  Paganini  at  Milan.  For  20  years  he  traveled 
hither  and  thither,  encountering  Paganini  (as  a rival)  at  Warsaw  in  1829  and 
knowing  Schumann  at  Leipsic  in  1835.  From  1839  he  was  concertmaster  at 
Dresden,  where  he  raised  the  band  to  great  excellence.  He  had  a specially 
noble  tone  and  much  skill  in  double-stopping,  and  his  conception  was  notably 
poetic.  He  wrote  4 concertos  and  many  lesser  pieces,  besides  editing  Gali- 
cian folk-songs  (2  vols.,  1833,  with  Zalewski). 


466 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


Charles  Auguste  de  Beriot  (d.  1870)  was  the  founder  of  a Belgian  school  of 
players,  an  offshoot  from  the  French.  He  was  born  at  Louvain  in  1802,  had 
foundation  training  there,  and  at  9 played  in  public.  In  1821  he  appeared  at 
Paris  and  later  in  England.  From  1821  he  was  royal  violinist  at  Paris  and 
from  1826  at  Brussels.  From  1830  he  toured  extensively,  partly  with  Mme. 
Malibran,  whom  he  married  in  1836  (she  died  the  same  year).  In  1842  he 
declined  a place  in  the  Paris  Conservatoire,  but  in  1843  accepted  one  in  the 
Brussels  conservatory.  In  1852  ill-health  caused  his  retirement  and  in  1858 
he  became  blind.  His  style  allied  him  with  Paganini  as  an  executant  and  with 
the  French  opera-writers  as  a composer.  He  wrote  with  fluent  elegance  10 
concertos,  4 trios,  many  variations  and  etudes,  and  a good,  but  prolix,  method 
(1858). 

Johann  Wenzeslaus  Kalliwoda  (d.  1866)  was  born  at  Prague  in  1800, 
studied  there  with  Dionys  Weber  and  Pixis,  and  from  1816  played  in  the 
theatre-orchestra.  From  1823  he  was  conductor  to  Prince  Fiirstenberg  at 
Donaueschingen  (So.  Baden),  retiring  in  1853  to  Carlsruhe.  Though  a re- 
fined and  pleasing  player,  he  was  more  notable  as  a popular  composer  of  no 
special  strength.  His  works  included  7 symphonies,  14  overtures,  13  orches- 
tral fantasias,  2 concertos,  7 concertinos,  many  chamber  and  solo  works, 
and  much  effective  vocal  music,  with  2 operas.  The  worth  of  some  of  these 
attracted  the  interest  of  Schumann. 

Wilhelm  Bernhard  Molique  (d.  1869)  was  born  at  Nuremberg,  and  studied 
under  his  father  and  Rovelli,  succeeding  the  latter  as  leader  at  Munich  in  1822. 
He  also  had  lessons  from  Spohr.  From  1826  he  was  leader  at  Stuttgart  un- 
der Lindpaintner,  and  in  1849  removed  to  London.  From  1822  he  made 
many  long  tours.  As  a player  he  followed  the  solid  school  of  Spohr,  and  as 
composer  ranked  high  for  both  invention  and  construction.  His  works  in- 
cluded a symphony,  6 excellent  concertos,  8 quartets,  several  concertanti  for 
various  combinations,  numerous  lesser  pieces,  etc.,  besides  the  oratorio 
Abraham  (i860,  Norwich)  and  2 masses. 

Among  scores  of  other  players  and  composers  the  following  names  may  be 
cited : — 

From  the  French  group  — Alexandre  Jean  Boucher  (d.  1861),  active  for 
more  than  60  years,  with  more  cleverness  than  musicianship ; Francois 
Antoine  Habeneck  (d.  1849),  best-known  of  three  brothers,  a public  player 
at  10  (1791),  then  a pupil  of  Baillot,  long  professor  at  the  Conservatoire 
(1806-15, ’25-48),  Kreutzer’s  successor  as  Op^ra-conductor  in  1826  and  the 
founder  of  the  Conservatoire  concerts  in  1828,  where  he  made  Beethoven’s 
symphonies  known  in  Paris,  the  composer  of  2 concertos  and  some  other 
works;  Jacques  FSreol  Mazas  (d.  1849),  also  a pupil  of  Baillot,  who,  after 
orchestral  work  from  1805,  in  1811-29  toured  all  Europe,  was  then  teacher  at 
Paris,  Orleans  and  (from  1837)  Cambrai,  and  left  works  still  highly  regarded, 
including  2 concertos,  much  chamber  music,  many  fantasias,  excellent  studies, 
methods  for  both  violin  and  viola,  and  3 operas;  Chretien  Urhan  (d.  1845), 
a pupil  of  Le  Sueur  and  an  assistant  of  Baillot  in  quartet  work,  from  1816  in 
the  Op6ra-orchestra,  prominent  at  the  Conservatoire  concerts  in  the  use  of 
Woldemar’s  5-string  violin,  and  the  composer  of  interesting  chamber 
pieces ; Jean  Henri  Simon  (d.  1861),  pupil  of  Lahoussaye  and  Rode,  a prom- 


IMPORTANT  VIOLINISTS 


467 


inent  teacher  at  Antwerp,  writing  7 concertos,  etc. ; and  Charles  Francois 
Jupin  (d.  1839),  pupil  of  Baillot,  from  1826  teacher  and  conductor  at  Strass- 
burg,  with  several  violin-works  and  an  opera  (1834).  These  last  illustrate 
how  the  influence  of  Parisian  masters  radiated  to  other  cities. 

From  the  Austrian  group — Ignaz  Schuppanzigh  (d.  1830),  a masterly 
ensemble-player,  much  associated  with  Beethoven,  especially  as  teacher  of 
the  viola  (1794),  leader  of  the  Lichnowsky  quartet  (1794-5),  conductor  at  the 
Augarten  (1798-9),  leader  of  the  Rasumowsky  quartet  (1808-16  and  again 
later)  ; Franz  Clement  (d.  1842),  who  was  heard  as  a prodigy  in  England 
soon  after  1790,  at  18  (1802)  became  conductor  at  Vienna,  about  1816  was 
associated  with  Weber  at  Prague,  in  1818  returned  to  Vienna  and  after  1821 
toured  with  the  singer  Catalani,  winning  a high  place  by  extreme  dexterity, 
graceful  sentiment  and  a phenomenal  memory,  and  writing  6 concertos  and 
25  concertinos,  studies  and  many  lesser  pieces,  besides  other  works  (for  him 
Beethoven  wrote  his  concerto  in  D,  1806)  ; and  Leopold  Jansa  (d.  1875),  a 
Bohemian  who  from  1824  was  in  the  Vienna  court-orchestra,  from  1834  was 
conductor  and  teacher  at  the  university,  and  from  1849  taught  in  London, 
writing  in  all  4 concertos,  nearly  40  duos,  8 quartets,  etc. 

From  the  various  German  groups  — Friedrich  Witt  (d.  1837),  from  about 
1790  leader  at  Oettingen  and,  after  tours,  from  1802  court-choirmaster  at 
Wurzburg,  writing  9 symphonies,  some  chamber  works,  2 operas  (1804,  ’06), 
2 oratorios  and  church  music;  the  five  brothers  Moralt,  four  of  whom, 
Joseph  (d.  1828),  Johann  Baptist  (d.  1825),  Philipp  (d.  1829)  and  Georg 
(d.  1818),  formed  a quartet  that  was  famous  at  Munich  from  before  1800  and 
was  one  of  the  first  to  make  extended  tours  for  the  rendering  of  chamber 
music;  Ludwig  Wilhelm  Maurer  (d.  1878),  pupil  of  Haack  at  Potsdam,  who 
from  1801  was  in  the  royal  orchestra,  from  1806  in  Russia,  meeting  Rode  and 
Baillot  and  becoming  choirmaster  to  a Moscow  noble,  from  1818,  after  tour- 
ing in  Germany  and  France,  choirmaster  at  Hanover,  from  1832  again  at 
Moscow  and  from  1845  at  Dresden,  writing  8 concertos,  a double  concerto, 
a concertante  for  4 violins,  a symphony,  2 quartets,  etc.,  besides  6 operas ; 
Friedrich  Ernst  Fesca  (d.  1826),  appearing  first  at  Magdeburg,  then  a pupil 
of  A.  E.  Miiller  at  Leipsic,  in  the  orchestra  there,  from  1806  at  Oldenburg, 
from  1808  at  Cassel  and  from  1815  at  Carlsruhe,  producing  in  a graceful  and 
effective  style  20  quartets,  5 quintets,  3 symphonies  and  4 overtures,  besides  2 
operas  (1819,  ’23)  and  excellent  church  music;  Johann  Nikolaus  Konrad 
Gotze  (d.  1861),  a representative  pupil  of  Spohr,  A.  E.  Muller  and  Kreutzer, 
who,  after  successful  German  and  Austrian  tours,  from  1826  was  court- 
director  at  Gotha,  retiring  in  1848,  and  the  composer  of  some  chamber  music 
and  several  operas  (from  1814)  ; Thomas  Taglichsbeck  (d.  1867),  pupil  of 
Rovelli  at  Munich,  who  traveled  widely  as  a virtuoso  and  in  1827-48  was 
court-choirmaster  at  Hechingen,  producing  many  violin-pieces,  2 symphonies, 
an  opera  (1823)  and  some  vocal  music;  Johann  Hermann  Kufferath  (d.  1864), 
pupil  of  Spohr  and  Hauptmann,  from  1823  director  at  Bielefeld  and  from 
1830  at  Utrecht,  where  he  became  influential  as  a vocal  teacher,  producing 
good  overtures,  cantatas,  sacred  works  and  a vocal  method  (1836)  ; and 
Jakob  Zeugheer  (d.  1865),  born  at  Zurich,  pupil  of  Wassermann  and  Franzl, 


468 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


who  in  1824-30  led  a noted  quartet  (‘Die  Gebriider  Herrmann’)  which 
imitated  the  Schuppanzigh  and  Moralt  quartets  in  touring  through  Germany, 
France,  Belgium  and  England  with  much  acceptance,  and  who  from  1831  was 
conductor  and  teacher  in  Manchester  and  from  1838  at  Liverpool,  writing 
considerable  instrumental  music  and  an  opera. 

A notable  Swedish  violinist  was  Johann  Friedrich  Berwald  (d.  1861),  pupil 
of  Vogler,  whose  extraordinary  precocity  in  playing  and  composing  made 
him  known  throughout  northern  Europe  before  he  was  10  (1798),  and  who 
settled  in  1816  at  Stockholm,  where  from  1834  he  was  royal  choirmaster, 
composing  concertos,  quartets,  symphonies,  etc. 

From  the  Italian  group  — Giuseppe  Maria  Festa  (d.  1839),  born  in  1771 
near  Naples  and  first  trained  there,  developing  into  an  able  player  and  a 
remarkable  conductor,  working  first  throughout  Italy,  from  1802  at  the  Paris 
Op^ra  and  from  1805  at  Naples,  and  writing  quartets,  duos,  etc.;  Pietro 
Rovelli  (d.  1838),  pupil  of  his  grandfather  and  of  Kreutzer,  who  became 
famous  from  about  1810  at  Paris,  Weimar,  Munich  and  Vienna,  and  from 
1819  was  choirmaster  and  concertmaster  at  Bergamo,  worthily  upholding  the 
Viotti  traditions  and  training  good  pupils;  and  Carlo  Bignami  (d.  1848), 
eminent  from  about  1825  as  soloist  and  conductor,  from  1837  bringing  the 
Cremona  orchestra  to  striking  perfection  and  winning  the  highest  commenda- 
tion from  Paganini. 

Here  should  be  named  some  virtuosi  on  other  stringed  instruments,  such 
as  the  viola-player  Franz  Weiss  (d.  1830),  in  the  Rasumowsky  and  Schup- 
panzigh quartets  at  Vienna ; many  ’cello-players,  like  Bernhard  Romberg  (d. 
1841),  considered  the  first  of  the  German  ’cellists  of  the  day,  who  made 
important  extensions  in  technique  and  wrote  striking  concertos  (see  sec.  149)  ; 
Friedrich  Dotzauer  (d.  i860),  in  the  Dresden  orchestra  in  1811-52  and  a 
noted  teacher;  Nicolas  Joseph  Platel  (d.  1835),  from  1813  at  Antwerp  and 
from  1824  at  Brussels;  Charles  Nicolas  Baudiot  (d.  1849),  from  1802  pro- 
fessor in  the  Paris  Conservatoire  and  in  the  court-orchestra,  the  author  of  two 
methods;  George  Onslow  (d.  1852),  a wealthy  nobleman,  trained  first  as  a 
pianist,  but  later  enthusiastic  over  chamber  music,  of  which  he  wrote  an 
enormous  amount  with  skill  and  elegance;  the  brothers  Wilhorski  (d.  1863, 
’56),  prominent  in  Russia;  Joseph  Merk  (d.  1852),  from  1818  active  at 
Vienna ; and  the  contrabassist  Wenzel  Hause,  teacher  at  Prague  and  the 
author  of  fine  studies  and  a method  (1828). 

182.  Other  Instrumental  Music.  — The  opening  period  of  the 
century  was  marked  by  an  immense  interest,  particularly  at 
Paris,  in  the  whole  range  of  instrumental  music.  This  is  illus- 
trated not  only  by  the  attention  to  the  piano  and  the  violin  as 
the  chief  artistic  implements,  but  by  parallel  attention  to  several 
of  the  wind  instruments  of  the  orchestra,  and  to  the  harp  and 
the  guitar  as  modern  successors  of  the  lyre  and  the  lute.  In 
every  case  efforts  were  made  to  better  the  mechanism  of  the 
instrument  itself,  so  as  to  improve  its  quality  or  extend  its  possi- 


OTHER  INSTRUMENTALISTS 


469 


bilities  — sometimes  with  notable  results.  In  all  cases,  too,  the 
number  of  virtuosi  multiplied,  bringing  the  several  instruments 
into  widespread  popularity  as  sources  of  concert  effectiveness, 
and  endeavoring  to  utilize  upon  them  the  leading  forms  of  com- 
position, like  the  concerto,  the  fantasia  or  divertissement,  the 
variation,  the  etude,  etc.  Furthermore,  the  field  of  chamber 
music  was  extended  by  ingenious  experiments  with  unusual  com- 
binations, in  which  sometimes  the  less-known  instruments  were 
made  prominent.  The  chief  centre  for  all  this  enterprising  ac- 
tivity was  Paris,  where  both  concertizing  and  teaching  along 
novel  lines  received  support  from  the  Conservatoire  and  the 
public. 

From  the  multitude  of  able  workers  in  this  field  wre  can  select  only  some 
bare  lists  of  the  best-known  players,  composers  and  teachers,  many  of  whom 
continued  active  through  the  next  period. 

Famous  flutists  were  Etienne  Francis  Gebauer  (d.  1823),  from  1801  in  the 
orchestra  of  the  Opera-Comique ; Benoit  Tranquille  Berbiguier  (d.  1838), 
pupil  of  Wunderlich  at  Paris,  where  from  1815  he  wrought  as  a remarkable 
virtuoso  and  fertile  composer;  Friedrich  Kuhlau  (d.  1832),  already  mentioned 
as  an  opera- writer  at  Copenhagen  (see  sec.  172),  who  wrote  fluently  for  flute, 
violin,  piano  and  voice;  Jean  Louis  Tulou  (d.  1865),  Wunderlich’s  best  pupil 
and  in  1813  his  successor  at  the  Opera,  as  well  as  from  1827  professor  at  the 
Conservatoire  — a strong  objector  to  the  Bohm  improvements;  Louis  Drouet 
(d.  1873),  Tulou’s  chief  competitor  at  Paris,  and  in  1836-54  choirmaster  at 
Coburg;  Kaspar  Kummer  (d.  1870),  from  1813  also  at  Coburg;  Johann 
Wilhelm  Gabrielski  (d.  1846),  from  1816  court-player  at  Berlin;  Anton 
Bernhard  Fiirstenau  (d.  1852),  from  1820  in  a similar  position  at  Dres- 
den, writing  abundantly  and  well ; and  Christian  Gottlieb  Belcke  (d.  1875), 
from  1819  at  Leipsic  and  from  1834  at  Altenburg. 

Among  the  oboists  were  Karl  Bochsa  (d.  1821),  a Bohemian  who  finally 
became  a music-seller  at  Paris;  Gustave  Vogt  (d.  1870),  from  about  1800 
eminent  at  the  Opera-Comique  and  the  Conservatoire;  Friedrich  Eugen 
Thurner  (d.  1827),  for  some  years  touring  from  Cassel  and  Brunswick  as  centres, 
and  dying  insane  at  Amsterdam;  and  Joseph  Sellner  (d.  1843),  from  1811 
with  Weber  at  Prague  and  from  1817  a famous  teacher  and  conductor  at 
Vienna,  the  author  of  a classic  method.  Distinguished  bassoonists  were  Karl 
Almenrader  (d.  1843),  from  1 812  at  Frankfort  and  from  1820  at  Nassau  (near 
Coblentz),  introducing  useful  improvements  in  his  instrument  and  writing 
about  it  (1824)  ; and  Karl  Barmann  of  Munich  (d.  1842). 

In  the  line  of  clarinettists  were  Johann  Simon  Hermstedt  (d.  1846),  from 
1800  choirmaster  at  Sondershausen,  where  he  invented  improvements  in  the 
instrument;  Heinrich  Joseph  Barmann  (d.  1847),  court-player  at  Munich,  in- 
timate with  both  Weber  and  Mendelssohn,  and  a prolific  composer ; Fried- 
rich Muller  (d.  1871),  from  1803  in  the  court-band  at  Rudolstadt,  retiring  in 


470 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


1854;  Franz  Thaddaus  Blatt  (d.  after  1830),  from  1818  teacher  in  the  Prague 
conservatory;  and  Friedrich  Beer  (d.  1838),  prominent  in  French  army 
music,  from  1831  professor  at  the  Conservatoire,  writing  a fine  method  (1836) 
— also  an  able  bassoonist. 

There  were  numerous  horn-players  of  renown,  like  Karl  Jakob  Wagner  (d. 
1822),  from  1790  active  at  Darmstadt,  where,  besides  much  orchestral  music, 
he  produced  5 operas  (1810-21) ; Louis  Francois  Dauprat  (d.  1868),  in 
youth  a band-player  in  the  army,  from  1808  at  the  Paris  Opera,  in  court  ser- 
vice and  teacher  at  the  Conservatoire  ; Martin  Joseph  Mengal  (d.  1851),  from 
1825,  after  a somewhat  similar  career,  conductor  at  Ghent,  Antwerp  and  The 
Hague,  and  from  1835  head  of  the  Ghent  conservatory  ; Joseph  Emile  Meifred 
(d.  1867),  pupil  of  Dauprat  and  from  1833  on  the  Conservatoire  staff,  with  seve- 
ral methods  (from  1829)  ; Jacques  Francis  Gallay  (d.  1864),  also  a pupil  of 
Dauprat,  a court-player  and  in  1842  Dauprat’s  successor  at  the  Conservatoire; 
Wouter  Hutschenruijter  (d.  1878),  a Dutchman,  working  at  Rotterdam,  Schie- 
dam and  Delft,  producing  a variety  of  both  instrumental  and  vocal  works,  in- 
cluding an  opera,  sacred  music  and  songs  ; together  with  Thomas  Harper  (d. 
1853),  a popular  trumpeter  at  London;  and  Friedrich  August  Belcke  (d. 
1874),  the  pioneer  virtuoso  on  the  trombone. 

The  harp  continued  to  attract  artistic  notice,  among  the  good  players  and 
composers  being  Marcel  de  Marin  of  Toulouse  (d.  c.  1861);  Martin  Pierre 
Dalvimare  (d.  1839),  iQ  1800-12  prominent  at  Paris;  Fran?ois  Joseph  Nader- 
mann  (d.  1835),  pupil  of  Krumpholz,  also  well-known  at  Paris,  being  active, 
with  his  brother,  in  his  father’s  harp-factory  and  from  1815  in  opposing 
Erard’s  improvements  in  mechanism;  Francois  Dizi  (d.  1847),  a protdgd  of 
Erard  at  London  and  from  1830  at  Paris,  with  a method  (1827)  ; Robert 
Nicolas  Charles  Bochsa  (d.  1856),  son  of  Karl  Bochsa  the  oboist,  a precocious 
player  and  composer  in  many  forms,  pupil  of  Mehul,  Catel,  Marin  and  Nader- 
mann,  from  about  1806  in  court  service,  from  1817  in  London,  where  he  con- 
ducted concerts  and  opera,  from  1839  (when  he  ran  away  with  Bishop’s 
wife)  on  extended  tours,  including  America  and  Australia,  with  8 operas 
(from  1813),  etc.,  besides  much  for  the  harp  and  a method;  and  Antoine 
Prumier  (d.  1868),  Nadermann’s  successor  in  1835. 

Among  the  guitar-players  were  Ferdinando  Carulli  (d.  1841),  a Neapolitan 
who  in  1808  came  to  Paris  and  became  the  founder  of  the  artistic  style  for  his 
instrument,  writing  elaborately  for  it,  with  a method  and  a theory  (1825); 
Fernando  Sors  (d.  1839),  a Spanish  refugee  at  Paris,  with  many  orchestral 
works  and  2 operas,  besides  his  guitar-pieces  and  a method ; Dionisio  Aguado 
y Garcia  (d.  1849),  another  Spaniard,  working  at  Madrid,  with  a method 
(1825)  ; and  Marco  Aurelio  Zani  de  Ferranti  (d.  1878),  born  at  Bologna, 
but  known  throughout  Europe,  settling  in  1827-46  at  Brussels  and  in  1855 
returning  to  Italy. 

183.  Problems  in  Instrument-Making. — The  whole  first  half 
of  the  19th  century  was  marked  by  energetic  efforts  to  improve 
the  construction  of  instruments.  Undoubtedly  most  of  these 
efforts  were  inspired  mainly  by  economic  motives,  being  de- 


THE  IMPROVEMENT  OF  INSTRUMENTS 


4 7 


signed  to  make  profit  out  of  the  rapidly  widening  popular  in- 
terest in  music.  But  most  of  them  were  also  guided  by  truly 
artistic  ambitions  and  were  put  forth  under  the  lead  of  experi- 
enced musicians,  so  that  their  total  value  to  artistic  progress  was 
immense,  even  though  some  experiments  were  failures  and  the 
utility  of  others  was  but  slowly  perceived. 

Naturally,  the  interest  in  piano-making  much  outstripped  all 
others  of  these  business  interests,  since  the  piano  was  seen  to 
be  on  the  whole  the  most  widely  available  of  musical  implements. 
Upon  its  construction  was  brought  to  bear  so  much  inventive 
genius,  in  both  Europe  and  America,  that  in  sonority,  tone- 
graduation  and  durability  the  instrument  was  actually  revolu- 
tionized. Improvements  in  orchestral  instruments,  also,  like 
the  flute,  the  oboe,  the  clarinet,  several  brass  instruments,  the 
harp,  etc.,  now  came  in  rapidly,  bringing  notable  gains  in  beauty 
of  tone,  variety  of  effects  and  ease  of  manipulation.  Such  im- 
provements made  solo-playing  far  more  impressive,  and  greatly 
enriched  orchestral  and  chamber  ensembles.  In  the  general 
development  of  musical  mechanisms  the  intricate  problems  of 
the  organ  were  not  forgotten,  though  the  conquest  of  some  of 
them  was  still  delayed.  The  invention  of  the  reed-organ  was 
really  a notable  event,  in  spite  of  its  small  value  as  a concert 
instrument,  since  its  simplicity  and  cheapness  speedily  made  it 
a useful  agent  in  the  popularization  of  music. 

Altogether,  then,  it  is  important  to  remember  that  side  by 
side  with  the  splendid  advance  made  in  composition  and  in 
technique  went  a purely  mechanical  advance  in  implements 
that  was  indispensable  for  attaining  the  total  artistic  results. 

In  piano-making  the  chief  centres  continued  to  be  London,  Paris  and 
Vienna.  But  it  is  notable  that  several  of  the  signal  improvements  in 
structure  were  first  conceived  by  workers  in  America.  When  we  consider 
how  far  behind  America  was  in  musical  culture  as  compared  with  any 
European  country,  its  ingenuity  and  enterprise  in  this  regard  from  about 
1800  is  astonishing.  Before  1840,  American  pianos  had  begun  to  rank 
among  the  best. 

During  the  18th  century  the  special  problem  in  piano-making  was  that 
of  the  action.  Of  this  two  main  types  were  prominent,  the  English  and 
the  Viennese,  differing  in  the  position  and  articulation  of  the  hammer 
(see  sec.  160).  In  1809  a notable  gain  was  made  by  Erard’s  invention 
of  a double  escapement,  enabling  the  hammer-stroke  to  be  repeated  with- 
out releasing  the  key.  But  before  1800  it  was  seen  that  the  next  great 


472 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


THE  IMPROVEMENT  OF  INSTRUMENTS 


473 


problem  was  to  secure  a fuller  tone,  with  more  sustained  or  ‘ singing  ’ 
quality,  and  more  variety.  For  this  longer,  heavier  and  tenser  strings 
were  demanded.  At  the  same  time  the  compass  of  the  keyboard  was 
being  stretched  from  4-5  octaves  in  the  earlier  patterns  to  5^  and  6 before 
1795,  and  to  7 by  about  1825,  with  two  or  three  strings  to  most  of  the 
keys.  Hence  the  strain  upon  the  frame  was  mounting  up  prodigiously. 
Hitherto  the  frame  had  been  made  wholly  of  wood,  most  ingeniously 
built  up.  In  1799  a London  patent  was  taken  out  for  longitudinal  metal 
braces,  and  by  1808  Broadwood  began  to  use  steel  tension-bars;  but  the 
union  of  wood  and  metal  was  not  altogether  successful.  In  1825,  however, 
the  first  full  iron  frame  in  one  piece  was  introduced  by  Babcock  of  Boston, 
Mass.,  and  in  1831  a similar  feature  appeared  in  London.  Metal  frames, 
either  of  combined  sections  or  cast  solid,  soon  generally  displaced  the* 
old  wooden  ones,  except  for  small  instruments.  For  a time  the  union  of 
different  materials  necessitated  ‘ compensating 1 devices  to  meet  variations 
in  temperature.  The  important  safeguard  of  ‘agraffes1  to  keep  the 
strings  from  being  displaced  by  the  hammer-blows  was  first  used  in  1808. 
‘Overstringing1  came  in  about  1835,  allowing  for  a decided  consolida- 
tion of  the  frame. 

In  the  search  for  sonority  the  character  of  the  string-wire  was  a critical 
point.  In  the  18th  century  only  brass  or  iron  was  used,  but  of  so  poor  a 
quality  that  no  great  tension  was  possible.  In  the  early  19th,  brass  was 
gradually  given  up  and  the  iron  was  much  improved.  In  1834,  if  not 
earlier,  the  introduction  of  steel  wire  changed  the  whole  problem,  making 
• possible  the  enormous  tensions  now  common  (amounting  in  present  con- 
cert grands  to  20-30  tons  !).  Still  another  most  important  factor  was 
seen  to  be  the  material,  form  and  fitting  of  the  soundboard  — a matter 
that  was  mainly  settled  empirically,  as  in  the  shaping  of  the  body  of  the 
violin. 

In  the  1 8th  century  the  two  standard  forms  of  piano  were  the  ‘ grand’ 
(shaped  like  the  harpsichord)  and  the  ‘square1  (like  the  clavichord).- 
In  1800  Hawkins  of  Philadelphia  patented  the  first  true  ‘upright,1  which 
involved  radical  modifications  of  both  frame  and  action.  This  type  was 
soon  developed  in  Europe  and  became  a favorite,  as  it  still  remains. 

In  the  long  line  of  distinguished  piano-makers,  following  pioneers  like 
Broadwood  and  Stein  (see  sec.  160),  the  following  may  be  named  as  specially 
enterprising  at  this  period  in  invention  or  the  establishing  of  factories  : — 

Sebastien  Erard  (d.  1831),  after  returning  from  London  to  Paris  in  1796 
(see  sec.  160),  made  his  first  grand,  in  1809  introduced  agraffes  and  worked 
out  the  principle  of  the  ‘repeating1  action  (patented  by  his  nephew  in  1821), 
and  contributed  to  the  betterment  of  the  harp  and  the  reed-organ.  Pierre 
Erard  (d.  1855),  his  nephew,  worked  first  as  his  uncle’s  representative  at 
London,  but  later  became  the  head  of  the  establishment  at  Paris.  The  latter 
published  a treatise  on  the  Erard  system  in  general  (1834). 

In  Germany  the  great  firm  of  Schiedmayer  was  founded  at  Erlangen  in 
1781  by  Johann  David  Schiedmayer  (d.  1806),  transferred  in  1809  to  Stuttgart 
by  his  son  Lorenz  Schiedmayer  (d.  i860),  and  greatly  developed  by  four 


474 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


grandsons,  becoming  equally  noted  for  pianos  and  reed-organs ; and  other 
houses  were  started  in  1794  at  Barmen  by  Johann  Adolph  Ibach  (d.  1848),  with 
whom  various  descendants  were  later  associated,  in  1814  at  Breslau  by  Michael 
Schnabel  (d.  1842),  and  in  1828  at  Vienna  by  Ignaz  Bosendorfer  (d.  1859). 

Wilhelm  Leberecht  Petzold,  who  was  trained  at  Dresden  in  1806  with  J. 
Pfeiffer,  opened  a noted  factory  at  Paris,  winning  a reputation  for  unusual 
solidity  of  workmanship,  and  devising  peculiar  varieties  of  uprights,  etc. 

The  celebrated  house  of  Pleyel  & Cie.  was  started  at  Paris  in  1807  by  the 
pianist  Ignaz  Joseph  Pleyel  (d.  1831),  who  was  joined  in  1811  by  Pape,  in 
1821  by  his  son  Camille  Pleyel  (d.  1855)  and  in  1824  by  the  virtuoso  Kalk- 
brenner.  The  fame  of  the  Pleyel  pianos  was  aided  from  1831  by  Chopin’s 
interest  in  them. 

Johann  Heinrich  Pape  (d.  1875),  a Hanoverian,  for  a time  with  Pleyel,  from 
about  1815  for  nearly  fifty  years  not  only  pursued  established  lines  of  manufac- 
ture, but  originated  countless  new  forms,  usually  more  ingenious  than  com- 
mercially available.  He  was  the  first  to  perfect  the  felting  of  the  hammer-heads, 
and  he  contests  with  Bohm  the  honor  of  introducing  overstringing. 

Robert  Wornum  (d.  1852)  had  a factory  in  London  from  1810,  and  from 
1811  was  specially  successful  in  perfecting  the  action  of  uprights,  particularly 
in  the  form  known  as  the  ‘ cottage  piano.’ 

American  piano-making  began  soon  after  1800,  the  chief  pioneers  being 
Alpheus  Babcock  and  John  Osborne  of  Boston.  The  latter  trained  Jonas  Chick- 
ering  (d.  1853),  who  in  1823  founded  the  Boston  firm  which  under  him  and 
his  sons  immediately  became  celebrated  for  original  inventions  and  fine 
workmanship. 

Heinrich  Engelhard  Steinweg  (d.  1871),  from  about  1820  an  organ-builder 
at  Seesen  (Brunswick),  before  1830  turned  to  piano-making,  soon  developing 
a successful  factory.  In  1848,  with  four  of  his  sons,  he  removed  to  New  York, 
leaving  his  eldest  son,  Theodor  (d.  1889),  to  continue  the  business  at  Seesen. 
In  1853  the  famous  firm  of  Steinway  & Sons  was  established  in  New  York. 
(The  German  house  since  1859  has  been  at  Brunswick.) 

American  organ-building  began  before  1750,  but  the  first  extensive  manu- 
facturer was  William  M.  Goodrich,  who  worked  at  Boston  in  1805-33.  The 
important  Boston  firm  of  E.  & G.  G.  Hook  was  founded  in  1827. 

In  violin-making  specially  noted  was  Jean  Baptiste  Vuillaume  (d.  1875), 
who  inherited  his  expertness  from  his  father  and  from  1817  worked  at  Paris, 
at  first  with  Chanot  and  Ldtd,  from  1828  independently.  He  had  great  suc- 
cess in  counterfeiting  old  Italian  instruments,  but  was  an  original  investigator 
and  inventor  as  well,  perfecting  powerful  violas  and  double-basses,  and  improv- 
ing strings  and  bows. 

The  standard  type  of  flute  at  the  opening  of  the  century  was  one  in  which 
the  lower  part  of  the  tube  was  slightly  conical.  In  1832  Theobald  Bohm  (d. 
1881),  a Munich  player  of  eminence,  greatly  improved  the  orchestral  value  of 
the  instrument  by  making  the  bore  cylindrical  and  radically  altering  the  sys- 
tem of  keys  and  fingering.  Similar  improvements  were  perhaps  earlier 
achieved  by  William  Gordon  (d.  after  1839),  a Swiss  army  officer.  The  Bohm 
system  was  later  extended  to  oboes,  bassoons  and  clarinets.  Its  value  lies  in 
the  equalization  of  quality  and  in  ease  of  manipulation. 


THE  IMPROVEMENT  OF  INSTRUMENTS 


475 


During  the  1 8th  century  clarinet-making  gradually  advanced,  but  without 
producing  entirely  competent  instruments.  In  1814  Ivan  Muller  (d.  1854),  a 
Russian  player,  then  working  in  Paris,  perfected  the  form  with  13  keys  which 
for  the  first  time  made  playing  possible  in  all  scales.  Though  not  at  first 
approved  by  academic  judges,  this  form  was  soon  widely  advertised  by  Muller’s 
brilliant  tours  and  by  his  method  (1825).  He  also  invented  an  alto  clarinet, 
which,  however,  did  not  dislodge  the  already  accepted  basset-horn.  Both  the 
clarinet  and  the  basset-horn  were  ably  handled  by  the  leading  orchestral 
writers  of  the  period,  so  that  much  incentive  was  given  to  their  makers. 

The  bass  clarinet  was  little  used  until  after  1830.  Its  perfecting  was 
largely  due  to  Charles  Joseph  Sax  (d.  1865)  and  his  son  Adolphe  Sax  (d.  1894). 
The  father  founded  a factory  at  Brussels 
in  1815,  in  which  the  son  was  trained.  The 
latter  went  to  Paris  in  1842  and  was  fol- 
lowed by  his  father  in  1853.  There  they 
developed  an  immense  business,  especially 
in  brass  instruments.  In  1842  the  son  ex- 
hibited the  ‘ saxophone,’  a novel  union  of 
a clarinet  mouthpiece  with  a metal  conical 
tube.  In  1845  he  devised  the  ‘saxhorn,’ 
a developed  bugle,  and  the  ‘saxotromba.’ 

All  these  were  made  in  sets  or  ‘families’ 
of  differing  pitch,  and  are  specially  valu- 
able in  military  bands.  A large  number 
of  less  useful  inventions  followed. 

Wilhelm  Friedrich  Wieprecht  (d.  1872), 
from  1824  in  royal  service  at  Berlin  and 
from  1838  chief  of  the  Prussian  military 
bands,  in  1835,  with  the  help  of  others, 
perfected  the  ‘bass  tuba  ’ and  in  1849  the 
less  useful  ‘bathyphon’  (somewhat  resem- 
bling the  bass  clarinet),  besides  other 
novelties.  He  contested  with  Sax  the 
invention  of  the  saxhorn,  but  without 
success  in  the  courts. 

In  harp-making  the  main  problem, 
aside  from  details  of  strength  and  so- 
nority, was  to  provide  for  chromatic  tones 
and  especially  for  complete  shifts  of  key 
without  multiplying  strings.  Early  in  the  1 8th  century  experiments  began 
with  little  ‘ crooks  ’ (adjustable  metal  angles  inserted  by  the  hand  or 
controlled  by  a pedal)  by  which  the  strings  could  be  raised  a semitone. 
From  about  1780  Pierre  Joseph  Cousineau  (d.  1824)  produced  two  or  three 
ingenious  devices  of  the  same  class,  including  a complete  double  action 
(securing  a rise  of  either  one  or  two  semitones).  Various  drawbacks  in  all 
these  were  finally  overcome  by  SSbastien  Erard,  the  piano-maker  (see  above), 
who  began  improving  the  harp  before  1790.  By  1810  he  had  perfected  a 
double  action  with  studded  disks  revolved  by  pedals  so  as  to  grip  the  strings 


476 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


Fig.  104. 


Fig.  105. 


Fig.  106. 


Fig.  104.  — Keyed  or  Kent  Bugle. 

Fig.  105. — Tenor  Ophicleide. 

FlG.  106.  — Bass  and  Alto  Saxhorns  — the  former  also  called  Euphonium. 


THE  IMPROVEMENT  OF  INSTRUMENTS 


477 


and  raise  the  pitch.  Thus  the  harp  became  a complete  transposing  instru- 
ment without  adding  strings  or  disturbing  the  fingering.  His  work  was 
continued  by  Pierre  Erard  (see  above),  who  published  an  account  of  the 
improvements  made  (1821). 

The  guitar  was  extensively  studied  from  about 
1800,  several  varieties  being  used,  such  as  the 
‘ English 1 (really  the  Italian  ‘ cetera, 1 see  fig.  68) 
and  the  Spanish,  the  former  showing  its  kinship 
with  the  lute  by  its  wire  strings  (partly  in  unison 
pairs)  and  its  pear-shaped  body,  and  the  latter 
having  gut  and  silk  (overspun)  strings  and  a 
body  shaped  like  an  ‘ 8.1  The  Spanish  gradually 
became  the  general  favorite.  In  1828  M.  Salomon 
(d.  1821),  a French  guitarist,  invented  the 1 harpo- 
lyre,’  having  21  strings  in  three  sets,  the  middle 
six  susceptible  of  ‘stopping’  against  a fretted 
neck  (as  in  the  guitar),  the  rest  giving  only 
‘open’  tones. 

The  essential  principle  of  the  ‘ orgue  expressif,’ 

‘ harmonium  ’ or  ‘ reed-organ  ’ is  that  of  the 
Chinese  cheng  (see  sec.  11),  the  tones  being 
produced  from  small  metal  tongues  (‘  reeds  ’) 
that  play  freely  in  openings  which  they  do 
not  quite  cover.  This  principle  of  the  ‘ free 
reed’  seems  to  have  reached  Europe  by  way 
of  St.  Petersburg,  where  experiments  were  made 
with  it  about  1780.  In  1788  these  efforts  be- 
came known  to  the  organist  Vogler,  who  in 
1790  induced  one  of  the  Russian  mechanicians, 

Rackwitz,  to  join  him  in  Holland  and  develop 
free-reed  stops  for  the  pipe-organ  (see  secs.  149, 

163).  Though  this  plan  had  some  result,  the 
more  important  historic  fact  is  that  soon  free  reeds  were  utilized  for  many 
much  smaller  instruments.  They  were  specially  useful  because  their  tones 
could  be  made  loud  or  soft  without  change  of  pitch. 

Just  before  1800,  free  reeds  were  carefully  studied  by  the  piano-maker 
Erard  (see  above)  and  by  Gabriel  Joseph  Grenie  (d.  1837).  The  former 
introduced  them  in  various  combinations  with  the  piano  and  the  pipe-organ. 
In  1810  the  latter  brought  out  his  ‘orgue  expressif,’  in  which  the  tone- 
intensity  was  governed  by  valves.  This  Erard  in  turn  greatly  improved. 
Meanwhile  analogous  inventions  were  appearing  in  Germany  and  England. 
From  about  1820,  instruments  multiplied  under  an  amusing  variety  of  names. 
Not  only  was  the  wind-supply  regulated,  but  much  ingenuity  was  put  upon 
improving  the  tone-quality  by  modifying  the  reeds  or  the  ‘ channels  ’ in  which 
they  were  set.  The  ablest  summary  of  these  experiments  was  made  by  Alex- 
andre Francois  Debain  (d.  1877),  whose  ‘harmonium’  was  patented  in  1840. 
The  ‘ percussion  ’ (little  hammers  to  put  the  reeds  into  quick  action)  was  first 


478 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


applied  by  Pierre  Alexandre  Martin  (d.  1879).  Devices  for  strengthening  the 
melody-notes  began  to  be  added  about  i860.  Before  1850,  American  makers 
entered  the  field,  introducing  several  novelties,  among  them  the  twisting  of 
the  reeds  to  improve  their  speech  and  tone,  and  the  reversion  of  the  wind- 
supply  (drawing  the  air  inward  through  the  reeds). 

To  the  free-reed  group  belongs  the  ‘concertina,’  invented  in  1829  by 
Charles  Wheatstone  (d.  1875),  the  eminent  English  physicist.  In  1829,  also, 
the  ‘accordion  ’ was  first  made  in  Vienna  by  Damian.  In  these  the  wind- 
supply  comes  from  a hand-bellows,  to  which  the  reeds  are  attached,  and  the 
keys  are  small  finger-levers  or  studs.  In  England  the  name  ‘ seraphine  ’ was 
from  1833  applied  to  a kindred  instrument  played  from  a keyboard. 

Johann  Christian  Dietz  of  Emmerich  (d.  c.  1845)  added  to  the  experiments 
with  friction  instruments  by  his  ‘ melodeon  ’ (1805)  and  ‘trochldon’  (1812), 
besides  producing  a keyboard  harp  (1814).  In  1810  Friedrich  Kaufmann 
of  Dresden  (d.  1866)  brought  out  the  ‘ harmonichord,’  in  which  Weber  was 
for  a time  interested.  These  are  but  specimens  of  many  efforts. 


Fig.  108.  — Guitars. 


CHAPTER  XXVIII 


CHURCH  AND  ORGAN  MUSIC 

184.  Confused  Tendencies  in  Catholic  Music.  — The  drift  toward 
demoralization  in  sacred  music  which  was  notable  before  1800 
became  more  conspicuous  later.  The  general  musical  world 
was  but  slightly  concerned  with  church  music  in  any  form,  ex- 
cept as  a necessity  in  liturgical  routine,  and  there  was  no  con- 
trolling standard  of  taste  regarding  it.  In  different  localities 
it  was  treated  in  diverse  and  even  capricious  ways.  At  Rome 
and  occasionally  elsewhere  in  Italy  there  were  some  who  sought 
to  hold  to  the  lofty  purism  of  the  old  16th-century  style,  though 
usually  with  concessions  on  the  side  of  accompaniments.  But 
generally  in  Italy  and  also  in  France  came  a marked  increase 
of  the  theatric  style,  bringing  over  into  the  church  whatever  of 
sensuous  charm  and  sumptuous  splendor  had  proved  popular 
in  the  opera.  Apart  from  the  Italians  the  most  striking  group 
of  writers  was  that  of  Vienna,  who  tended  to  apply  to  sacred 
music  the  energetic  form  and  brilliant  instrumentation  of  the 
Viennese  school  of  concert  music.  In  this  group,  as  in  that  of 
the  Italians,  the  degree  of  independence  and  warm  sincerity 
varied  greatly,  many  composers  having  only  a superficial  sense 
of  the  sacred  music  problem,  while  a few  entered  into  it  with 
real  sympathy.  Here  and  there  single  composers  made  signifi- 
cant attempts  to  utilize  all  the  resources  of  modern  methods  in 
a spirit  fully  analogous  to  that  of  the  best  early  contrapuntists. 
Of  these  the  most  notable  was  the  cosmopolitan  and  many- 
sided  Cherubini,  whose  dignified  nobility  of  expression  went 
far  toward  offsetting  the  tawdry  sensationalism  of  Rossini  and 
his  imitators. 

Luigi  Cherubini  (d.  1842),  already  mentioned  as  an  opera-writer  (see  sec. 
154),  had  his  early  training  at  Milan  under  Sarti  wholly  in  the  strictest  sort 
of  church  music.  But  from  1780  for  30  years  he  then  gave  himself  up  to 
opera-writing.  Not  till  1809  and  still  more  after  1816,  when  he  became 
royal  choirmaster  and  head  of  the  Conservatoire,  did  he  resume  the  serious 

479 


480 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


contrapuntal  style.  This  latest  period  of  his  career  reached  to  about  1830, 
only  one  important  work  coming  later.  He  wrote  in  all  the  forms  required 
by  the  Catholic  service,  including  many  shorter  pieces,  but  his  renown  rests 
mainly  upon  his  11  masses  and  2 Requiems.  Of  the  former,  those  in  F 
(1809,  3 voices),  D minor  (1811),  C (1816),  G (1819,  coronation  of  Louis 
XVIII.)  and  A (1825,  coronation  of  Charles  X.)  are  counted  the  strongest. 
The  Requiem  in  C minor  (1816)  is  his  most  famous  work,  though  that  in  D 
minor  (1836)  is  fully  as  noble — the  maturest  expression  of  his  genius.  His 
ultimate  style  was  so  comprehensive  that  it  cannot  be  classified  with  any 
school.  He  could  write  almost  in  the  purest  manner  of  the  Palestrina  period, 
but  had  also  perfect  command  of  the  resources  of  modern  vocalism  and 
instrumentation.  These  he  knew  how  to  use  with  imagination  and  earnest- 
ness. He  therefore  illustrates  a consummate  blending  of  the  old  and  the 
new. 

Marco  Santucci  (d.  1843),  another  learned  contrapuntist,  was  almost 
exactly  Cherubini’s  contemporary.  A pupil  of  Feneroli  at  Naples,  from  1797 
he  was  choirmaster  at  the  Lateran  in  Rome,  succeeding  Anfossi,  and  from  1808 
was  connected  with  the  cathedral  of  Lucca.  Though  somewhat  productive, 
few  of  his  works  remain  — a Requiem,  2 Magnificats,  a Te  Deum,  some 
soprano  cantatas,  several  psalms,  many  organ-versets  and  a set  of  suonate  in 
fugued  style  for  the  piano.  An  early  motet  for  16  voices  (1806)  was  curiously 
commended  by  a Neapolitan  jury  as  ‘ new,’  simply  because  they  did  not 
know  the  Palestrina  style. 

Giuseppe  Baini  (d.  1844),  born  at  Rome  in  1775  and  trained  by  his  uncle 
and  by  Jannaconi,  entered  the  choir  at  St.  Peter’s  in  1802  as  a bass  and  in 
1817  succeeded  his  teacher  as  choirmaster.  He  thus  had  over  40  years’ 
intimate  contact  with  music  of  the  severe  order  and  access  to  the  papal 
archives.  Though  writing  somewhat  freely  in  the  regular  forms,  he  is  chiefly 
known  as  a composer  by  his  Miserere  (1821).  His  lifelong  enthusiasm  for 
Palestrina  was  shown  by  a famous  monograph  (1828)  and  by  a projected 
complete  edition  of  Palestrina’s  works. 

Giuseppe  Pilotti  (d.  1838)  exemplifies  a parallel  development  under  the 
austere  impress  of  Martini.  Brought  up  in  poverty  as  an  organ-maker,  he 
was  finally  enabled  to  study  with  Mattei  (Martini’s  pupil),  and  at  once  showed 
unusual  talent.  After  serving  as  choirmaster  at  Pistoia,  in  1826  he  followed 
Mattei  at  Bologna  and  from  1829  was  also  professor  of  counterpoint  at  the 
Lyceum.  Excepting  two  operatic  ventures  (1810,  ’16),  his  works  were  all  for 
the  church. 

Pietro  Raimondi  (d.  1853)  presents  the  amazing  anomaly  of  success  at  once 
in  popular  opera  and  in  stupendous  church  counterpoint.  Born  at  Rome  in 
1786,  he  had  long  training  at  Naples  from  Tritto,  and,  after  some  hardships, 
settled  in  Genoa,  where  his  first  opera  was  produced  (1807).  To  this  suc- 
ceeded not  less  than  80  other  operas  and  ballets  for  various  stages  (notably  II 
ventaglio , 1831,  Naples),  the  vogue  of  which  was  often  considerable,  though 
checked  by  the  rage  for  Rossini.  From  1824  he  was  theatre-director  at 
Naples,  from  1832  professor  of  counterpoint  at  the  conservatory  of  Palermo, 
and  in  1852  for  a few  months  choirmaster  at  St.  Peter’s  in  Rome.  His 
operatic  work  continued  till  about  1845.  But  along  with  this  ran  a stream  of 


CATHOLIC  CHURCH  MUSIC 


481 


sacred  works,  including  8 oratorios,  masses,  Requiems,  the  whole  of  the  Psalms, 
innumerable  motets,  etc.,  mostly  in  an  extremely  learned  a cappella  style, 
many  also  with  orchestral  accompaniment.  His  specialty  was  devising  fugues 
for  various  numbers  of  voices  which  could  be  rendered  by  separate  choirs  or 
combined  polychorically  (as  6 choirs  of  4 voices  that  could  be  united  into  one 
of  24,  16  of  4 that  could  be  made  one  of  64,  etc.).  To  crown  all,  he  completed 
(1852,  Rome)  a set  of  three  oratorios,  Potifar , Giuseppe  and  Giacobbe , which 
were  first  given  separately  and  then  combined  into  a composite  rendering. 
The  mental  power  evinced  in  all  this  was  phenomenal  and  in  all  his  works  are 
passages  of  beauty  and  originality ; but  he  spent  himself  in  achieving  tours 
de  force. 

In  addition  to  Generali  (d.  1832),  Paer  (d.  1839),  Mayr  (d.  1845)  and 
Morlacchi  (d.  1841),  who  were  prominent  in  sacred  music  as  well  as  in  opera 
(see  sec.  175),  the  less  important  names  may  be  given  of  Giuseppe  Niccolini 
(d.  1842),  the  writer  of  about  60  operas  (from  1793)  in  the  Neapolitan  vein, 
who  from  1819  was  choirmaster  at  Piacenza  and  thenceforth  composed  pro- 
lifically  for  the  church;  and  Melchiore  Balbi  (d.  1879),  from  *818  opera- 
director  at  Padua  and  from  1854  cathedral-choirmaster,  who,  after  a few  operas 
(1820-5),  turned  to  church  works  and  theoretical  studies. 

What  may  be  called  the  Viennese  type  of  Catholic  music  was 
a part  of  the  ‘classical’  style  as  a whole  of  which  Vienna  was 
the  original  centre.  It  began  with  Haydn  and  Mozart,  and  was 
sustained  by  a host  of  lesser  writers.  It  tended  to  differ  from 
Italian  types,  as  a rule,  in  having  less  mere  sentimentality  of 
melody  and  conventional  theatric  passion,  and,  on  the  side  of 
scholarship,  in  adhering  more  to  the  German  style  of  instru- 
mental counterpoint  than  to  the  more  archaic  vocal  counterpoint 
of  the  South.  Its  whole  structure  was  usually  much  affected 
by  the  forms  of  instrumental  concert  music  which  all  the  great 
Viennese  masters  pushed  into  the  foreground.  Hence  came  a 
compactness  and  clarity,  a certain  nervous  vigor,  a general  air 
of  intellectuality  that  were  less  frequent  in  the  common  Italian 
work.  The  voices  were  perhaps  treated  less  ‘ vocally,’  but  the 
instrumental  side  had  much  elegance  and  force.  Of  course,  be- 
hind these  external  characteristics  played  the  personality  of 
the  individual  composer,  varying  widely  in  religious  earnestness 
and  profundity  of  spiritual  imagination.  Yet  even  strong  in- 
dividuality could  not  far  outstep  the  limitations  of  the  general 
style,  which  was  more  concerned  with  outward  finish  and 
brilliance  than  with  depth  of  conviction.  That  the  style,  how- 
ever, stands  in  somewhat  close  relation  with  the  feeling  of  Cath- 
olic musicians  is  shown  by  the  fact  that  it  has  continued  in  fairly 
general  use  ever  since. 


482 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


The  more  striking  names  in  the  long  Vienna  list  are  as  follows : — 

Joseph  von  Eybler  (d.  1846),  born  in  1765,  grew  up  in  contact  with  Haydn 
and  Mozart  and  was  a pupil  of  Albrechtsberger,  who  placed  his  genius  “ next 
to  Mozart.”  For  30  years  from  1794  he  was  choirmaster  at  the  great  Bene- 
dictine monastery  and  from  1804  also  Salieri’s  assistant  in  the  Imperial  Chapel, 
succeeding  him  there  in  1824.  Though  from  1794  he  wrote  much  chamber 
music,  piano-sonatas  and  dances,  2 symphonies  and  a few  operas,  he  is  almost 
wholly  known  as  a church  composer  of  decided  strength  and  nobility.  Among 
his  over  30  masses,  7 Te  Deums,  many  motets  and  2 oratorios  (including  Die 
vier  letzten  Dinge , 1810),  his  Requiem  in  C minor  is  counted  the  best.  Eybler 
attended  Mozart  in  his  last  sickness  and  was  the  one  who  first  endeavored  to 
complete  the  latter’s  Requiem. 

Less  important  names  of  the  same  period  were  Weigl  (d.  1846),  who  after 
about  1825  (see  sec.  172)  wrote  10  masses,  several  motets  and  cantatas  and 
2 oratorios  (including  a Passion,  1804);  Joseph  Ignaz  Schnabel  (d.  1831), 
plainly  of  the  Vienna  group,  though  identified  with  Breslau,  where  from  1805 
he  was  cathedral-choirmaster  and  from  1812  also  efficient  in  stimulating  music 
at  the  university,  the  Catholic  schools  and  among  the  general  public,  writing 
a large  amount  of  meritorious  church  music ; and  Sey fried  (d.  1841),  equally 
abundant  and  popular  in  opera  (see  sec.  172)  and  in  sacred  works,  including 
several  sacred  operas,  like  Abraham , Saul  (1823),  etc. 

Beethoven  (d.  1827)  was  in  no  way  fitted  for  practical  success  in  church 
music.  His  two  masses,  that  in  C (1807,  for  the  Esterhazy  Chapel)  and 
the  Missa  solennis  (1818-23),  stand  quite  by  themselves.  The  latter  is  a 
unique  concert- work,  ranking  in  individuality  and  sublimity  with  Bach’s  B 
minor  mass,  though  in  a wholly  different  style.  The  oratorio  Christus  am 
Oelberge  [ The  Mount  of  Olives]  (1803)  is  burdened  by  a hasty  and  melodra- 
matic libretto.  All  these  works  have  importance  as  self-expressions  on 
Beethoven’s  part  and  as  passionate  efforts  to  find  adequate  embodiments  for 
religious  feeling,  but  have  no  close  relation  with  general  progress. 

Johann  Gansbacher  (d.  1844),  a Tyrolese,  educated  first  at  Innsbruck  and 
from  1801  under  Vogler  and  Albrechtsberger  at  Vienna,  had  an  uneasy  career, 
partly  in  the  army,  until  1823,  when  he  followed  Preindl  as  choirmaster  at 
St.  Stephen’s,  Vienna.  Over  200  works  of  his  are  listed,  but  very  few  have 
been  published.  His  style  was  too  good  to  be  popular,  but  not  original 
enough  to  endure. 

Sigismund  von  Neukomm  (d.  1858),  born  in  1778,  belongs  to  the  Vienna 
group  because  brought  up  under  Michael  Haydn  at  Salzburg  and  from  1798 
a special  protegd  of  the  aged  Joseph  Haydn  at  Vienna.  After  the  latter’s 
death  in  1809  he  made  the  grand  tour  of  northern  Europe  and  settled  at 
Paris,  where  he  succeeded  Dussek  as  the  favorite  of  Talleyrand.  In  1816  he 
became  royal  choirmaster  in  Brazil,  returning  in  1821  to  his  Paris  connec- 
tions. From  1826  he  traveled  often  and  widely,  being  specially  popular  in 
London  until  displaced  by  Mendelssohn.  Throughout  his  long  career  he  was 
extolled  as  virtuoso  (upon  several  instruments)  and  composer,  receiving 
countless  honors.  His  works  number  over  1000,  including  many  piano-  and 
organ-pieces  and  about  200  songs,  besides  some  chamber  music,  a symphony, 
orchestral  fantasias  and  an  opera.  For  the  Catholic  service  he  wrote  15 


CATHOLIC  CHURCH  MUSIC 


483 


masses,  5 cantatas  and  many  psalms,  and  for  the  English  Church  a Morning 
and  Evening  Service  complete.  He  also  produced  several  oratorios,  including 
a trilogy  on  the  Entombment,  the  Resurrection  and  the  Ascension  (c.  1826), 
Das  Gesetz  des  alten  Bundes  [ Mount  Sinai ] (c.  1810),  David , and  cantatas 
for  Easter  and  Whitsunday.  He  was  an  enthusiast  over  Palestrina,  but  in 
his  superficial  facility  was  quite  unable  to  follow  in  that  master’s  steps. 

Joseph  Drechsler  (d.  1852),  a Bohemian,  worked  from  1807  in  Vienna,  first 
as  teacher  and  opera-director,  later  as  organist  and  choirmaster,  in  1844  fol- 
lowing Gansbacher  at  St.  Stephen’s.  An  indefatigable  worker  of  no  small 
ability,  he  stands  credited  with  17  masses,  3 cantatas  and  many  motets  for 
the  church,  5 operas  and  many  lesser  stage-works,  instrumental  pieces  and 
songs,  an  organ-method,  a harmony  and  other  instruction-books. 

To  these  may  be  added  several  whose  work  likewise  extended  into  the 
next  period,  such  as  Joseph  Blahagk  (d.  1846),  from  1802  an  operatic  tenor 
and  from  1824  Preindl’s  successor  at  St.  Peter’s,  with  numerous  works; 
Ignaz  Aszmayer  (d.  1862),  a pupil  of  Michael  Haydn  and  at  first  organist  at 
Salzburg,  from  1815  pupil  of  Eybler  and  in  1824  his  successor  at  the  Schot- 
tenstift,  from  1825  court-organist,  and  from  1838  Weigl’s  assistant  and  in  1846 
his  successor  as  court-choirmaster,  with  about  60  works,  including  15  masses 
and  3 oratorios;  and  Franz  Schubert  (d.  1828),  whose  sacred  works  form 
but  a small  section  of  his  total  production,  but  are  marked  by  the  same  charm 
(see  secs.  173-4).  Schubert’s  masses  were  all  written  for  the  parish  church  of 
Lichtenthal ; the  largest  of  them  is  that  in  EJ?  (1828).  His  brother,  Ferdi- 
nand Schubert  (d.  1859),  was  also  a considerable  sacred  composer. 

Among  the  church  musicians  associated  with  Dresden,  mention  has  already 
been  made  of  Morlacchi  (d.  1841),  choirmaster  from  1810  (see  sec.  1 75),  and 
Reissiger  (d.  1859),  opera-director  from  1827  (see  sec.  172).  With  these 
maybe  named  the  eminent  contrapuntist  August  Alexander  Klengel  (d.  1852), 
a pupil  of  Clementi,  who  was  court-organist  from  1816.  He  was  a diligent  stu- 
dent of  Bach  and  among  his  works  (wholly  for  the  piano)  was  a set  of  48  can- 
ons and  fugues  intended  to  rival  the  Wohltemperirtes  Clavier. 

To  this  period  also  belong  the  Portuguese  pianist  Joao  Domingos  Bomtempo 
(d.  1842),  who,  after  several  years  at  Paris  and  London,  about  1823  returned 
to  Lisbon,  becoming  in  1833  court-choirmaster  and  head  of  the  conservatory, 
the  composer  of  several  masses  and  a Requiem  (1819),  besides  piano-pieces 
and  a method  (1816)  ; and  the  Spaniards  Juan  Bros  (d.  1852),  choirmaster 
at  Malaga,  Leon  and  Oviedo,  with  many  church  works  of  renown  in  Spain ; 
Francisco  Xavier  Gibert  [Gisbert]  (d.  1848),  a Madrid  priest,  said  to  have  had 
a notable  genius  for  a cappella  writing;  and  Francesco  Andrevi  (d.  1853), 
choirmaster  at  Valencia,  Seville  and  Barcelona  (also  in  1832-42  at  Bordeaux), 
another  strong  church  writer. 

185.  The  Revival  of  Protestant  Organ  Music.  — In  the  circle  of 
German  Protestantism  the  special  feature  of  the  period  was  a 
notable  reawakening  of  interest  in  the  organ  as  a vehicle  of  musi- 
cal expression.  It  had  seemed  as  if  the  early  enthusiasm  for  this 
instrument  in  Germany,  having  reached  its  culmination  in  the 


4§4 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


1 8th  century  in  Bach,  was  exhausted.  It  is  true  that  no  second 
Bach  appeared  to  carry  the  development  to  new  heights.  But  the 
lapse  in  interest  that  occurred  after  Bach’s  death  was  now  suc- 
ceeded by  a revival  that  merits  attention,  if  for  no  other  reason 
because  of  its  service  in  recalling  the  works  and  style  of  Bach 
himself  to  popular  memory  and  appreciation.  It  seems  strange 
that  he  should  ever  have  been  forgotten  or  ignored,  but,  since  he 
was,  a positive  movement  was  needed  to  restore  him  to  his  rightful 
place.  The  most  useful  single  agent  in  bringing  to  light  the  Bach 
traditions  as  preserved  by  his  pupils  was  the  eminent  organist 
Rinck,  but  the  Englishman  Wesley  and  later  the  youthful  Men- 
delssohn were  powerful  coadjutors.  In  consequence,  the  num- 
ber of  strong  players  and  composers  in  this  noble  branch  of 
musical  art  suddenly  advanced,  introducing  a new  strain  of 
serious  expression  that  had  value  in  shaping  later  progress. 
In  both  the  Lutheran  and  the  Anglican  Churches  this  was  some- 
what coincident  with  a renewed  attention  to  the  enrichment  of 
public  worship  in  other  ways. 

Christian  Rinck  (d.  1846)  was  born  in  Thuringia  in  1770  and  was  brought 
up  in  contact  with  much  organ  music.  From  1786  he  studied  with  Kittel  of 
Erfurt,  the  last  survivor  among  Bach’s  best  pupils,  in  1790  became  town- 
organist  at  Giessen  and  in  1805  took  a similar  post  at  Darmstadt,  where  from 
1819  he  w7as  court-organist,  besides  teaching  in  the  gymnasium.  His  tours  as 
a virtuoso,  with  his  numerous  and  varied  works,  gave  him  an  immense  reputa- 
tion and  attracted  a host  of  pupils.  His  genius  as  a composer  was  not  of  the 
highest  class,  but  his  style  had  solidity  and  vigor,  so  that  its  influence  was 
wholesome.  He  published  almost  countless  preludes,  postludes,  chorale-elab- 
orations, variations,  etc.,  and  a famous  Orgelschule  (1818),  besides  a large 
number  of  sacred  vocal  works,  including  a mass,  a Vater  Unser,  cantatas, 
duets,  solos,  a Choralbuch  for  Hesse  (1814)  and  other  collections,  not  to 
speak  of  some  piano  works. 

Michael  Gotthard  Fischer  (d.  1829)  was  trained  by  Kittel  at  Erfurt,  and 
worked  all  his  life  there  as  organist  in  the  two  leading  Protestant  churches  and 
as  teacher.  He  was  well  known  as  a player  and  as  a fertile  composer,  not 
only  of  large  numbers  of  organ-pieces,  including  some  fugues,  but  of  2 sym- 
phonies, some  choral  works  and  a chorale-collection  (1821). 

Johann  Christian  Bartel  (d.  1831),  educated  at  Leipsic,  was  from  1792 
teacher  near  Chemnitz,  from  1797  cantor  at  Greiz,  then  toured  as  a virtuoso, 
and  from  1804  was  Krebs’  successor  as  court-organist  at  Altenburg.  He  pro- 
duced many  organ  works,  cantatas,  psalms  and  some  piano-pieces,  of  which 
only  a few  have  been  published. 

Christian  Gottlob  August  Bergt  (d.  1837),  at  first  educated  at  Dresden  and 
Leipsic  for  the  church,  from  1 802  was  organist  at  Bautzen,  where  he  led  a 


THE  REVIVAL  OF  ORGAN  MUSIC 


485. 

choral  society.  He  was  a fruitful  and  admired  composer  in  many  forms,  in- 
cluding 3 Passions,  several  cantatas,  hymns,  motets,  chorales  and  over  60  organ- 
pieces,  besides  operettas  (from  1801),  many  part-songs,  trios  and  songs,  several 
symphonies  and  some  piano-sonatas. 

Johann  August  Gunther  Heinroth  (d.  1846),  son  of  a veteran  organist  at 
Nordhausen,  after  study  at  Leipsic  and  Halle,  taught  at  various  places  (includ- 
ing a Jewish  school  at  Seesen)  and  in  1818  followed  Forkel  at  Gottingen. 
He  greatly  improved  the  musical  service  of  the  Jewish  synagogues,  and  wrote 
some  vocal  music  and  many  pedagogical  works  (from  1821). 

Friedrich  Schneider  (d.  1853),  born  in  1786  near  Zittau,  studied  there  with 
Unger  and  developed  precociously.  From  1807  he  was  organist  at  the  uni- 
versity church  at  Leipsic  and  in  1813  was  transferred  to  the  Thomas kirche. 
From  1810  he  also  began  service  as  opera-conductor.  From  1821  he  was 
court-choirmaster  at  Dessau,  where  he  greatly  bettered  the  orchestra,  founded 
fine  choral  societies  and  a noted  music-school  (1829),  and  conducted  many 
festivals  at  various  places  (1819-47).  He  had  a long  line  of  eminent  pupils, 
and  was  altogether  a figure  of  influence  and  worth.  His  most  successful  works 
were  some  of  his  16  oratorios,  such  as  Das  Weltgericht  (1819)  and  Die  Siind- 
fluth  (1823).  He  also  wrote  14  masses,  25  cantatas,  some  motets  and  an 
organ-method  (1829-30),  besides  other  instruction-books,  7 operas,  400  male 
choruses,  200  songs,  a great  number  of  symphonies  and  overtures,  60  piano- 
sonatas,  etc. 

Johann  Schneider  (d.  1864),  his  brother,  born  in  1789,  was  far  more  distin- 
guished as  an  organist,  being  counted  before  1820  as  the  finest  player  in  Ger- 
many. He  too  was  a pupil  of  Unger,  in  1811  followed  his  brother  at  Leipsic, 
from  1812  was  at  Gorlitz,  from  whence  he  made  many  brilliant  tours,  and  in 
1825  became  court-organist  at  Dresden,  a post  that  he  made  famous  through 
the  musical  world.  He  was  a specialist  in  the  music  of  Bach,  an  expert 
in  technique  and  registration,  and  the  trainer  of  a large  number  of  great  pupils. 
His  published  works,  all  for  the  organ,  were  few  and  not  specially  significant. 

To  these  might  be  added  many  more,  such  as  Johann  Gottlob  Werner 
(d.  1822),  whose  active  career  began  at  Freiberg  (Saxony)  in  1798  and  who 
from  1819  was  cathedral-organist  at  Merseburg,  writing  many  organ-pieces, 
instruction-books  for  organ  (1805,  ’23),  piano  (1806)  and  in  theory  (1818-9), 
and  two  Choralbiicher ; Johann  Andreas  Drobs  (d.  1825),  a self-taught  Er- 
furter  who  from  1810  was  organist  of  the  Petrikirche  at  Leipsic  — a worthy 
teacher  and  composer;  Friedrich  Wilhelm  Riem  (d.  1857),  precocious  as  a 
pianist,  pupil  of  Hiller  at  Leipsic,  from  about  1807  organist  and  singing- 
teacher  there,  and  from  1814  cathedral-organist  at  Bremen  and  founder  of  a 
school;  Karl  Heinrich  Zollner  (d.  1836),  well  known  from  before  1820  as  a 
facile  virtuoso  and  composer  in  many  forms,  gifted,  but  inconstant;  Bern- 
hard  Klein  (d.  1832),  who  studied  at  Paris  under  Cherubini,  and,  after  some 
service  at  the  Cologne  cathedral,  was  from  1818  at  Berlin  as  teacher  and 
conductor,  a strong  sacred  composer  of  oratorios  and  motets,  besides  3 operas 
and  some  piano  works;  and  August  Wilhelm  Bach  (d.  1869),  a fine  player 
who  was  Klein’s  colleague  as  teacher  at  Berlin  from  1822,  succeeding  Zelter  in 
1832,  and  training  many  excellent  pupils,  besides  writing  organ  and  vocal 
music,  and  editing  a popular  Choralbuch  (1830). 


486 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


Among  the  Germans  who  cultivated  Catholic  music  with  success  may  be 
named  August  Ferdinand  Haser  (d.  1844),  one  of  a large  musical  family,  who 
from  1797  was  cantor  at  Lemgo,  in  1806-13  on  concert-tours  with  his  sister, 
and  from  1817  teacher  and  conductor  at  Weimar,  composing  much  choir 
music,  an  oratorio  (1817),  3 operas,  songs,  2 instruction-books  in  singing,  etc. ; 
Michael  Henkel  (d.  1851),  a pupil  of  Vierling,  who  was  all  his  life  associated 
with  Fulda  as  cantor  and  court-musician,  a prolific  writer ; Georg  Vincent 
Roder  (d.  1848),  from  1805  court-choirmaster  at  Wurzburg,  from  1830  con- 
ductor at  Augsburg  and  from  1839  royal  choirmaster  at  Munich,  producing 
choir  music  in  abundance;  and  Kaspar  Ett  (d.  1847),  from  1816  court- 
organist  at  Munich,  a diligent  student  of  the  strict  contrapuntal  styles  of  the 
older  masters. 

To  this  period  belongs  the  impulse  in  the  music  of  the  Russian 
Church  which  led  to  its  modern  artistic  importance.  Historically, 
the  musical  liturgy  of  Russia  was  derived  from  mediaeval  sources 
in  a way  analogous  to  that  of  the  Catholic  Church,  but  its  de- 
velopment was  meagre  and  insignificant  until  vivified  by  the 
enthusiam  and  technical  skill  of  Bortnianski,  who  brought  into 
it  something  of  the  nobility  of  western  styles. 

Dimitri  Bortnianski  (d.  1825)  was  born  in  1751.  At  St.  Petersburg  and 
Venice  he  studied  with  Galuppi  and  became  infatuated  with  Italian  music, 
producing  2 operas  (1776-8).  About  1782  he  returned  to  Russia,  becoming 
imperial  music-director  and  ultimately  completely  reforming  the  style  of  the 
Imperial  Choir.  His  compositions,  in  a manner  analogous  to  that  of  the  old 
Italian  school,  included  a mass,  many  fine  psalms,  etc.,  mostly  a cappella. 

186.  Music  in  England. — Although  during  the  opening  decades 
of  the  century  the  interchange  of  music  and  musicians  between 
England  and  the  Continent  noticeably  increased  in  volume  and 
frequency,  English  musical  production  was  still  almost  without 
influence  upon  the  great  currents  of  progress.  The  three  main 
lines  of  activity  were  the  drafting  of  numerous  ballad-operas  and 
operettas,  often  ‘ adapted  ’ freely  from  larger  Continental  works 
so  as  to  feed  the  popular  appetite  for  dramatic  amusement,  the 
production  of  many  glees  and  songs,  and  the  supply  of  music 
for  the  Anglican  church  service.  The  last  two  classes  enlisted 
the  best  musicianship,  but  these  were  exactly  the  classes  least 
likely  to  be  elsewhere  appreciated  or  reproduced,  even  when 
they  were  so  much  as  known.  Yet,  though  comparatively  iso- 
lated, English  musical  interest  was  considerable  in  amount, 
often  discriminating  and  alert  in  quality  and,  in  some  few  cases, 
marked  by  original  power. 


MUSIC  IN  ENGLAND 


487 


The  connection  of  England  with  the  rise  of  pianism  and  its 
literature  has  already  been  noted.  It  also  shared  promptly  in 
the  Bach  revival  on  its  organ  side.  It  contributed  some  excel- 
lent instrumentalists  and  singers.  And  it  stood  ready  to  extend 
enthusiastic  greeting  to  such  geniuses  as  Weber  and  Mendelssohn. 
The  first  visit  of  the  latter  in  1829  marked  the  beginning  of  a 
new  era  in  the  growth  of  musical  life  in  England. 

Among  the  notable  institutions  founded  in  this  period  the  following 
may  be  mentioned : — 

The  Birmingha?n  Festivals , after  five  experimental  gatherings  (1768- 
90),  from  1796  were  held  triennially,  continuing  with  but  one  exception 
to  the  present  time.  With  their  firm  establishment  they  steadily  broad- 
ened from  their  original  exclusive  devotion  to  Handel’s  choral  works,  be- 
coming one  of  the  factors  in  the  stimulation  of  general  musical  taste. 

The  Concentores  Sodales  was  a society  founded  by  Horsley  in  1798  to 
promote  practice  and  production  along  lines  like  those  of  the  earlier  Glee 
and  Catch  Clubs.  It  continued  until  1847. 

The  Philharmonic  Society  began  in  1813  and  became  at  once  the 
centre  of  instrumental  music  of  the  highest  order  for  the  Kingdom.  For 
a long  period  its  rehearsals  and  concerts  were  conducted  by  the  principal 
members  in  turn.  Occasionally  visiting  conductors  appeared,  as  Cheru- 
bini (1815),  Spohr  (1820, ’43),  Weber  (1826),  Mendelssohn  (1829,  ’42, 
’44,  ’47),  etc. 

The  Royal  Academy  of  Music  was  organized  in  1822  through  the  exer- 
tions of  Lord  Burghersh  (later  Earl  of  Westmoreland).  This  school, 
after  many  vicissitudes,  has  now  become  a large  and  highly  influential 
institution.  Its  principals  have  been  Crotch  (from  1822),  Potter  (from 
1832),  Charles  Lucas  (from  1859),  ^ S.  Bennett  (from  1866),  Macfarren 
(from  1875)  and  Mackenzie  (from  1888).  It  is  partially  supported  by 
a subvention  from  the  government. 

Samuel  Wesley  (d.  1837),  born  in  1766,  the  son  of  Charles  Wesley  the 
poet  and  hymnist,  was  musically  gifted,  like  all  the  Wesley  family.  Before  he 
was  10  he  had  become  an  expert  organist  and  violinist,  and  had  written  parts 
of  an  oratorio ; at  1 1 he  published  a set  of  lessons  for  the  harpsichord.  At  2 1 
he  suffered  a serious  accident  which  affected  his  brain,  disabling  him  for  seven 
years  then  and  twice  afterwards  for  a like  period.  In  the  intervals  between 
these  attacks  he  made  himself  famous  as  an  exceptional  organist,  as  the  first 
Bach  enthusiast  in  England,  and  as  an  abundant  and  strong  composer.  His 
works  included  services,  about  10  anthems,  3 masses  and  many  antiphons 
(indicating  his  early  interest  in  the  Roman  Catholic  service),  innumerable 
hymn-tunes,  many  glees  and  songs,  5 symphonies,  3 overtures,  some  chamber 
music,  about  10  organ-concertos,  many  preludes,  fugues,  etc.,  and  much  piano 
music.  In  1808-9  he  wr°te  a series  of  important  letters  to  his  friend  Jacob 
regarding  the  wTorks  of  Bach.  His  brother  Charles  Wesley  (d.  1834)  was  also 
a good  organist. 


488 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


William  Crotch  (d.  1847),  born  in  1775,  was  equally  precocious,  playing  in 
public  before  he  was  4,  at  11  becoming  an  organist  at  Cambridge,  and  at  14 
writing  an  oratorio.  From  1790  he  was  organist  at  Oxford,  where  in  1797  he 
succeeded  Philip  Hayes.  From  1800  he  lectured  much  at  Oxford  and  London, 
and  in  1822-32  was  the  first  principal  of  the  Royal  Academy.  He  was  a fine 
organist  and  a successful  teacher.  Besides  text-books,  he  wrote  some  20 
anthems,  3 oratorios,  including  Palestine  (1812),  3 organ-concertos,  fugues, 
etc.,  and  several  cantatas  and  glees. 

Thomas  Attwood  (d.  1838),  born  in  1765,  studied  first  under  Nares  and 
Ayrton,  then  at  Naples  and  with  Mozart  at  Vienna.  From  1787  he  worked 
in  London,  from  1796  as  organist  at  St.  Paul’s  and  as  composer  to  the  Chapel 
Royal.  For  about  20  years  he  was  much  engaged  upon  dramatic  music,  but 
afterward  devoted  himself  to  church  writing.  He  was  a close  friend  of  Men- 
delssohn. His  works,  in  a tasteful  and  solid  style,  include  over  20  operas  and 
operettas  (1792-1807),  many  songs,  glees  and  piano-pieces,  5 services  and 
about  20  anthems,  including  those  for  the  coronations  of  George  IV.  and 
William  IV. 

John  Clarke  [-Whitfeld]  (d.  1836),  a pupil  of  Philip  Hayes,  from  1789 
was  organist  at  Ludlow,  from  1793  choirmaster  at  Dublin,  from  1799  organist 
at  Cambridge  and  from  1820  at  Hereford,  besides  being  from  1821  professor  at 
Cambridge.  He  published  services  and  anthems  (4  vols.  from  1805),  many 
songs  and  glees,  an  edition  of  Handel’s  works  (17  vols.,  1809)  and  an  anthem- 
collection.  His  church  music  is  still  somewhat  used,  and  his  settings  of 
poems  by  Walter  Scott  were  long  popular. 

George  Smart  (d.  1867),  pupil  of  Ayrton  and  Arnold,  was  from  1791  an 
organist,  violinist  and  teacher  in  London,  from  about  1801  in  constant  request 
as  a conductor,  especially  for  the  Philharmonic  Society  (1813-44)  and  of 
numerous  festivals  (from  1823),  and  from  1822  organist  to  the  Chapel  Royal. 
He  was  an  authority  upon  the  traditional  renderings  of  Handel,  and  was  inti- 
mate with  Weber  and  Mendelssohn.  He  edited  Gibbons’  madrigals  (1841) 
and  wrote  some  anthems,  glees  and  canons  (collections,  1863). 

Lesser  names  of  those  working  mainly  in  sacred  music  are  Thomas  Greatorex 
(d.  1831),  from  1788  a popular  teacher  and  conductor  in  London  and  at  festi- 
vals, and  from  1819  organist  at  Westminster,  writing  some  church  music  and  a 
few  glees;  Benjamin  Jacob  (d.  1829),  from  1794  organist  at  Surrey  Chapel 
(Rowland  Hill’s)  and  famous,  with  Wesley  and  Crotch,  as  a superior  organist; 
Matthew  Camidge  (d.  1844),  son  of  John  Camidge  and  in  1803  his  successor 
as  organist  at  York,  publishing  tunes  (1789),  a collection  of  Cathedral  Music 
(about  1800),  including  6 anthems  of  his  own,  and  a small  musical  catechism  ; 
and  Thomas  Adams  (d.  1858),  from  1802  noted  as  a phenomenal  organ- 
player,  excelling  in  extemporization,  with  many  organ  works  — fugues,  pre- 
ludes, interludes,  variations — also  some  anthems,  tunes  and  songs.  Adams 
was  much  concerned  in  making  effective  the  public  concerts  given  from  1817 
upon  the  ‘ apollonicon,’  a large  and  ingenious  mechanical  organ. 

William  Horsley  (d.  1858),  from  1794  a London  organist  and  soon  active 
in  reviving  glee  music  and  promoting  vocal  concerts,  was  a prolific  writer  of 
excellent  glees  (5  collections,  1801-7),  many  songs,  3 symphonies,  besides 


MUSIC  IN  ENGLAND 


489 


tunes  (1820,  ’28)  and  elementary  handbooks  (1825,  ’47).  He  edited  Call- 
cott’s  glees,  with  a biography  (1824),  miscellaneous  glees  (1832)  and  one 
volume  of  Byrd’s  Cantiones  (1842).  He  was  one  of  Mendelssohn’s  friends. 

Henry  Rowley  Bishop  (d.  1855)  early  displayed  lyric  and  dramatic  ability. 
From  1804  he  wrote  fluent  stage-pieces,  from  1810  was  conductor  at  various 
theatres,  from  1841  was  professor  at  Edinburgh  and  from  1848  at  Oxford, 
receiving  knighthood  in  1842.  Besides  many  fine  songs  and  glees,  he  wrote 
an  enormous  number  (about  80)  of  operettas  and  adaptations  of  European 
operas  (1804-41),  such  as  The  Circassian  Bride  (1809),  Guy  M aimer ing 
(1816),  Maid  Marian  (1822),  Cortez  (1823),  etc.,  and  edited  collections  of 
national  songs,  etc. 

William  Hawes  (d.  1846),  for  nearly  30  years  connected  with  the  Chapel 
Royal,  was  from  1824  a successful  opera-director,  bringing  out  adapted  works 
and  several  of  his  own  (1829-35).  He  was  also  a good  composer  and  editor 
of  glees  and  madrigals,  besides  being  interested  in  music-publishing. 

Among  many  other  secular  composers  were  Jonathan  Blewitt  (d.  1853), 
from  1 81 1 prominent  at  Dublin,  returning  to  London  in  1826,  with  about  10 
stage-pieces  and  many  popular  Irish  ballads;  John  Davy  (d,  1824),  from  be- 
fore 1800  a violinist  and  teacher  in  London,  with  many  favorite  songs  and 
about  15  plays  (from  1800)  ; Thomas  Simpson  Cooke  (d.  1848),  born  at 
Dublin  and  early  active  in  theatre  music,  from  1813  a tenor  in  London,  a good 
singing-teacher  and  from  1828  manager  and  conductor,  with  about  15  operettas 
(1814-35),  partly  adapted,  and  numerous  glees  and  songs;  Thomas  Forbes 
Walmisley  (d.  1866),  pupil  of  Attwood,  from  1810  organist  in  London,  a 
good  glee-writer  (from  1814)  ; Charles  Edward  Horn  (d.  1849),  a stage- 
singer  and  composer,  with  about  25  operettas  (1810-30),  who  also  lived  in 
the  United  States  in  1833-43  and  from  1847  (finally  as  conductor  of  the 
Handel  and  Haydn  Society)  — the  writer  of  many  songs  and  glees,  and  2 
oratorios;  John  Parry  (d.  1851),  a Welsh  player  upon  the  clarinet  and 
flageolet,  from  1807  teaching  in  London,  long  the  conductor  of  Welsh  festi- 
vals, where  he  was  called  ‘Bardd  Alaw’  (Master  of  Song),  in  later  life  a 
musical  critic  and  writer  upon  Welsh  music,  with  incidental  music  to  several 
plays  (1814-29)  ; William  Beale  (d.  1854),  a choirboy  under  Arnold  and  R. 
Cooke,  from  1816  in  the  Chapel  Royal,  from  1820  organist  at  Cambridge  and 
from  1821  in  London,  with  successful  madrigals  and  glees  (from  1813)  ; and 
the  Earl  of  Westmoreland  [till  1844  Lord  Burghersh]  (d.  1859),  active  as  a 
soldier  and  diplomat,  but  also  a diligent  musician,  with  7 Italian  operas  at 
Florence  and  London  (1821-45),  3 symphonies,  chamber  and  piano-pieces, 
songs,  glees  and  some  church  music  — besides  being  the  promoter  of  the 
Royal  Academy  in  1822. 


CHAPTER  XXIX 


GROWTH  OF  MUSICAL  LITERATURE 

187.  Musical  Publications.  — Along  with  all  other  lines  of  in- 
tellectual development  in  the  first  decades  of  the  century,  the 
scientific,  philosophical  and  historical  discussion  of  music  grew 
steadily  in  dimensions  and  importance.  On  the  side  of  science, 
acoustical  problems  were  still  further  investigated,  many  in- 
teresting questions  about  rhythmic  and  metric  structure  brought 
into  view,  the  modern  doctrines  of  chord-building  and  harmonic 
progression  reduced  to  more  satisfactory  form,  and  the  system- 
atic presentation  of  all  the  technical  divisions  of  composition,  now 
including  to  some  extent  instrumentation,  made  more  logical  and 
complete.  The  leading  theorists  were  almost  all  teachers  at  the 
Paris  Conservatoire.  On  the  side  of  aesthetics,  continued 
interest  was  shown,  though  without  any  notable  contribution 
except  from  the  psychological  point  of  view  represented  by 
Herbart.  The  practical  spirit  of  the  period  was  illustrated  by 
the  many  energetic  efforts  to  diffuse  musical  knowledge  and 
enlarge  popular  education  in  it  by  various  pedagogical  plans, 
like  those  of  Logier  and  Galin,  aiming  sometimes  at  the  improve- 
ment of  teaching  in  music-schools,  sometimes  at  a promotion  of 
song  as  a part  of  general  education.  The  number  of  pedagogi- 
cal books  for  the  voice  and  for  various  instruments  becomes  be- 
wildering, implying  not  only  a widespread  conviction  of  the 
value  of  discipline  and  system,  but  a progressing  popular  demand 
for  instruction.  Though  no  striking  general  work  on  musical 
history  was  put  forth,  a goodly  number  of  special  studies  in 
various  directions,  particularly  biography,  attest  the  advance  of 
the  historical  spirit.  Criticism  for  the  time  being  was  but 
slightly  represented.  In  Germany  an  awakening  of  interest  in 
the  management  of  church  services  evoked  many  articles  and 
small  brochures  upon  the  treatment  of  sacred  music.  The  found- 
ing of  musical  periodicals  and  of  publishing  houses  went  on 
more  or  less  everywhere. 


490 


MUSICAL  LITERATURE 


491 


In  the  following  summaries  only  such  names  are  included  as  fall  more  or 
less  completely  within  the  period  1800-30.  Many  writers  who  continued 
active  later  are  elsewhere  mentioned  (see  secs.  227-228). 

The  discussion  of  acoustical  questions  naturally  connected  itself  with 
musical  theory  and  aesthetics,  though  also  pursued  as  a part  of  pure  physics. 
The  chief  acousticians  of  the  time  were  Chladni  (d.  1827),  already  mentioned 
(see  sec.  165),  and  Savart. 

F61ix  Savart  (d.  1841),  trained  as  a mechanician  and  surgeon,  about  1815 
began  careful  studies  in  sound,  and  about  1820  was  made  professor  of  acoustics 
at  the  College  de  France.  The  brilliance  of  his  researches  in  every  branch  of 
the  subject  was  made  known  through  many  technical  papers  in  the  A?inales 
de  physique  et  de  chimie.  They  decidedly  influenced  the  scientific  construc- 
tion of  instruments,  especially  those  of  the  wind  class.  His  demonstrations, 
appliances  and  ascertained  laws  are  still  everywhere  used.  In  1819,  just  after 
Savart  began  his  work,  Charles  Cagniard  de  la  Tour  (d.  1859)  perfected  the 
improved  ‘sirene,’  which  is  used  in  determining  the  vibration-numbers  of 
tones. 

Other  acoustical  publications  were  made  by  Georges  Marie  Raymond  (d. 
1839)  upon  the  physical  basis  of  music  (1813)  ; by  Gottfried  Weber  (d. 
1839),  the  eminent  theorist,  on  wind  and  stringed  instruments  (from  1816)  ; 
by  Ernst  Heinrich  Weber  (d.  1878),  professor  at  Leipsic,  on  physiological 
acoustics  (from  1820)  ; by  Ernst  Gottfried  Fischer  (d.  1831),  professor  at 
Berlin,  on  the  vibrations  of  strings,  etc.  (from  1825)  ; and,  most  notably,  by 
Johann  Heinrich  Scheibler  (d.  1838),  in  the  silk  business  at  Crefeld,  who  from 
1834  made  important  studies  in  tuning,  invented  a remarkably  accurate  series 
of  standard  forks,  and  advocated  the  so-called  1 Stuttgart  pitch  ’ (a  = 440, 
c = 528),  as  against  Sauveur’s  pitch  (c  = 512  = 29). 

Among  the  writers  upon  aesthetics  were  the  critic  Rochlitz  of  Leipsic  (d. 
1842),  in  some  early  essays  (1796)  ; the  oriental  scholar  Guillaume  AndrS 
Villoteau  (d.  1839),  i*1  comparisons  of  music  with  other  arts  (1807)  ; Johann 
Gottlieb  Wendt  (d.  1836),  professor  at  Gottingen,  with  several  essays  (from 
1808)  ; Ignaz  Franz  Mosel  of  Vienna  (d.  1844),  in  a work  on  dramatic  style 
(1813)  ; the  celebrated  professor  at  Gottingen,  Johann  Friedrich  Herbart 
(d.  1841),  who  approached  the  subject  from  both  the  psychological  and  phil- 
osophical sides  (1811,  ’24-5,  ’31);  Friedrich  Konrad  Griepenkerl  of  Bruns- 
wick (d.  1849),  a follower  of  Herbart  (1827)  ; Wilhelm  Christian  Miiller  (d. 
1831)  of  Bremen  (1830);  the  bibliographer  Lichtenthal  (d.  1853)  of  Milan 
(1831);  and  Karl  Christian  Friedrich  Krause  (d.  1832)  of  Munich  (posthu- 
mous). 

From  the  multitude  of  writers  on  theory  only  a selection  can  be  made, 
including  those  who  either  displayed  real  mastery  or  acquired  popular 
influence. 

The  only  striking  Italian  theorist  (except  Cherubini)  was  Bonifazio  Asioli 
(d.  1832),  who  from  before  1780  was  famous  as  a precocious  sacred  composer,  as 
a remarkable  piano-virtuoso  and  (from  1785)  as  a popular  opera-writer,  and 
who,  having  come  to  Milan  in  1799  as  court-choirmaster,  from  1808  was  pro- 
fessor of  composition  at  the  new  conservatory,  retiring  in  1814  to  Correggio. 


492 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


He  was  very  prolific  in  works  for  the  church,  and  in  other  vocal  and  instru- 
mental pieces,  and  produced  7 operas,  an  oratorio  and  many  cantatas ; but 
he  is  best  known  for  lucid  and  able  text-books  (from  1809),  treating  not  only 
of  harmony  and  composition,  but  of  singing,  the  piano,  the  clarinet,  the  double- 
bass,  etc. 

The  French  line  of  theorists  includes  these  : — 

Charles  Simon  Catel  (d.  1830),  already  referred  to  as  an  opera-writer  (see 
sec.  177),  who  was  the  first  professor  of  harmony  in  the  Conservatoire  (from 
1795).  His  text-book  (1802)  was  used  there  until  about  1820.  He  was  the 
first  French  authority  to  give  up  the  imperfect  theory  of  Rameau  and  to  re- 
gard chords  as  built  up  normally  in  thirds,  the  type-forms  being  derived  from 
the  harmonics  of  the  dominant.  Jerome  Joseph  Momigny  (d.  1838),  from 
1800  a music-publisher  in  Paris,  advocated  a system  like  Catel’s,  though  justi- 
fied by  different  reasoning  and  put  forward  with  needless  conceit  (several  books, 
1806-34).  He  made  the  first  clear  statement  of  the  doctrine  of  measure, 
phrase  and  period. 

Anton  Reicha  (d.  1836)  was  born  at  Prague  in  1770  and  was  brought  up 
by  an  uncle  there  and  at  Bonn.  From  1788  he  was  a flutist  in  the  Bonn 
orchestra  (with  Beethoven)  and  undertook  orchestral  composition.  From 
1794  he  taught  at  Hamburg  and  in  1799  went  to  Paris  with  operatic  aspirations. 
From  1802  he  was  in  Vienna,  on  familiar  terms  with  Beethoven  and  other 
leading  musicians.  In  1808  he  returned  to  Paris  and  now  had  some  success 
with  operas.  But  he  won  his  place  chiefly  as  a teacher  and  a writer  of  orches- 
tral and  chamber  works.  In  1818  he  followed  Mehul  as  professor  of  counter- 
point at  the  Conservatoire.  He  published  an  extended  treatise  (1824-6)  and 
several  other  theoretical  works  (from  1814).  He  had  the  faculty  of  clear  pre- 
sentation, and  his  writings  long  commanded  respect.  His  principal  power  as  a 
composer  lay  in  chamber  music  (over  100  works),  much  of  which  is  highly 
esteemed.  He  was  also  a fine  pianist  and  the  ambitious  writer  of  sonatas, 
fugues,  etudes  and  variations. 

Luigi  Cherubini  (d.  1842),  the  many-sided  composer  (see  secs.  154,  163, 
184),  professor  at  the  Conservatoire  from  1816,  was  recognized  as  the  most 
powerful  contrapuntist  of  his  day.  He  transmitted  his  learning  to  many  pupils, 
and  late  in  life  (1835),  assisted  by  Halevy,  published  a famous  treatise  on 
counterpoint  that  is  a classic.  He  had  rare  gifts  in  combining  richness  of 
structure  with  clarity  and  beauty,  and  his  varied  experience  gave  him  a re- 
markable breadth  of  style  and  sympathy. 

Gottfried  Weber  (d.  1839),  a prominent  lawyer,  from  1802  at  Mannheim, 
from  1814  at  Mayence  and  from  1818  at  Darmstadt,  was  an  enthusiastic  musical 
student  and  organizer.  Through  a diligent  use  of  authorities,  like  Kirnberger 
and  Knecht,  he  elaborated  a compendium  of  composition  (3  vols.,  1817-21), 
which  was  the  most  important  German  text-book  of  the  period  and  remained 
useful  long  after.  It  contained  the  first  use  of  certain  symbols  (letters  and 
numerals)  for  designating  chords  which  are  still  common.  He  published 
other  theoretical  manuals  (1822,  ’33)  and  wrote  much  for  periodicals,  especially 
for  Cdcilia,  a magazine  which  he  edited  at  Mayence  from  1824  till  his  death. 
He  composed  considerable  vocal  music,  sacred  and  secular. 


MUSICAL  LITERATURE 


493 


Works  of  less  importance  were  issued  in  1801  by  Pietro  Gianelli  of  Venice 
(d.  1822?)  ; in  1802-29  by  Antonio  Calegari  of  Padua  (d.  1828),  whose  early 
ideas  were  extremely  mechanical;  from  1812  by  William  Crotch  of  Oxford 
(d.  1847)  ; from  1815-6  by  Johann  Heinrich  Goroldt  of  Quedlinburg  (d.  after 
1835)  ; in  1818-9  by  J.  G.  Werner  of  Merseburg  (d.  1822)  ; in  1820  by  Fried- 
rich Schneider  of  Leipsic  and  Dessau  (d.  1853)  ; in  1820-4  by  the  Portuguese 
Rodrigo  Ferreira  da  Costa  (d.  1825)  ; from  1826  by  August  Swoboda  of 
Vienna;  in  1827  (ed.  by  Seyfried)  by  Joseph  Preindl  of  Vienna  (d.  1823)  ; 
from  1828  by  Dionys  Weber  of  Prague  (d.  1842)  ; about  1830  on  instrumen- 
tation by  Giuseppe  Pilotti  of  Bologna  (d.  1838)  ; in  1830  by  Daniel  Jelen- 
sperger  of  Paris  (d.  1831)  ; in  1830-2  by  Domenico  Quadri  of  Milan  and 
Naples  (d.  1843)  ; and  in  1834  by  Victor  Dourlen  of  Paris  (d.  1864),  a fol- 
lower of  Catel. 

On  rhythm  and  metre  there  were  several  notable  discussions,  as  from  1796 
by  the  Leipsic  professor  Johann  Gottfried  Jakob  Hermann  (d.  1848)  ; from 
1807  by  Johann  August  Apel  (d.  1816),  also  of  Leipsic,  who  strongly  opposed 
Hermann’s  views;  and  in  1821  by  August  Bockh  of  Berlin  (d.  1867). 

In  the  field  of  history,  the  only  apparently  comprehensive  work  was  one  in 
1819  (2  vols.)  by  the  London  organist  Thomas  Busby  (d.  1838),  which  was 
neither  original  nor  well-ordered.  More  important  were  monographs  on 
special  topics,  as  in  1799  on  music  in  Bremen  by  W.  C.  Miiller  (d.  1831) ; in 
1804-7  on  ancient  and  modern  music  in  the  Orient  by  G.  A.  Villoteau  (d. 
1 839),  who  went  with  Napoleon’s  Egyptian  expedition  in  1798;  in  1810  on 
contrasts  between  ancient  and  modern  styles  by  Joubert  de  La  Salette  (d. 
1832),  who  also  wrote  on  notation  ; in  1817  on  the  Thomasschule  in  Leipsic 
by  Friedrich  Wilhelm  Ehrenfried  Rost  (d.  1835)  1 in  1818  on  the  half-century 
of  music  in  Vienna  and  in  1835  on  the  Royal  Library  there  by  J.  F.  Mosel 
(d.  1844)  ; in  1821  on  the  mediaeval  modes  by  the  Moravian  Peter  Mortimer 
(d.  1828)  ; in  1824  on  notation  systems  by  G.  M.  Raymond  (d.  1839)  ; in 
1827-32  an  able  series  of  articles  on  topics  in  ancient  and  mediaeval  music  by 
Francois  Louis  Perne  (d.  1832),  who  in  1818  succeeded  Catel  at  the  Paris 
Conservatoire;  in  1829  on  the  rise  of  the  chorale  by  Johann  Friedrich  Naue 
(d.  1858),  organist  at  Halle;  in  1829-32  on  Gregorian  music  and  on  the 
organ  by  Franz  Joseph  Antony  (d.  1837),  organist  at  Munster;  and  in 
1831-2  some  notes  by  Georg  Christoph  Grosheim  (d.  1847). 

Contemporaneous  Italian  music  was  discussed  in  1811  by  the  Venetian 
Giovanni  Agostino  Perotti  (d.  1855)  ; in  1822  (2  vols.)  by  the  Russian 
Gregor  Wladimir  Orlow  (d.  1826)  ; and  again  in  1836  by  the  Viennese  Franz 
Sales  Handler  (d.  1831).  The  problem  of  Mozart’s  Requiem  was  opened 
soon  after  1820  by  Gottfried  Weber  (d.  1839),  to  whom  replies  were  made  in 
1826-7  by  Stadler  (d.  1833)  and  Mosel. 

Criticism  mingled  with  history  was  represented  by  various  keen  articles 
(from  1810),  by  E.  T.  A.  Hoffmann  (d.  1822)  ; by  the  valuable  miscellanies  Fiir 
Freunde  der  Tonkunst  (4  vols.,  1824-32)  of  the  Leipsic  editor  Johann  Fried- 
rich Rochlitz  (d.  1842),  which  are  specially  strong  upon  vocal  music;  and 
by  the  famous  essays  Ueber  Remheit  der  Tonkunst  (1825)  of  the  Heidelberg 
professor  Anton  Friedrich  Justus  Thibaut  (d.  1840),  which  latter  were  attacked 
(1826)  by  the  Swiss  publisher  Hans  Georg  Nageli  (d.  1836). 


494 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


In  the  field  of  biography,  the  more  important  monographs  were  those  on 
Guido  (1B11)  by  Luigi  Angeloni  (d.  1842)  ; on  Salieri  (1827)  by  I.  F.  Mosel 
(d.  1844)  ; on  Mozart  (1828)  by  Georg  Nicolaus  von  Nissen  (d.  1826)  and  his 
wife  (Mozart’s  widow)  ; on  Palestrina  (1828)  by  Giuseppe  Baini  (d.  1844), 
which  was  revised  in  German  (1834)  by  F.  S.  Kandler  (d.  1831),  who  had 
previously  (1820)  written  on  Hasse ; and  on  Beethoven  (1838)  by  Ferdi- 
nand Ries  (d.  1838). 

Sketches  and  studies  of  varying  value  included  many  on  Haydn  (from 
1810),  as  by  Georg  August  Griesinger  (d.  1828),  Albert  Dies  (d.  1822)  and 
Giuseppe  Carpani  (d.  1825)  ; a series  (1803-10)  on  various  composers  before 
and  after  1800  by  Ignaz  Ferdinand  Arnold  (d.  1812)  ; two  books  (1810,  ’30) 
on  sundry  violinists  from  Corelli  to  Paganini  by  Francois  Fayolle  (d.  1852)  ; 
accounts  of  Grdtry  (1814)  and  Viotti  (1825)  by  the  violinist  Baillot  (d. 
1842);  eulogies  on  Paisiello,  Monsigny  and  Mehul  (1817-9,  collected  with 
others,  1834-7)  by  Antoine  Chrysostome  Quatremere  de  Quincy  (d.  1849); 
and  a long  line  of  critiques  of  Rossini  (from  1818)  by  Carpani  (d.  1825), 
Joseph  Louis  d’Ortigue  (d.  1866),  Johann  Gottlieb  Wendt  (d.  1836)  and 
others,  including  the  celebrated  plagiarist  ‘Stendhal’  (d.  1842).  The  singer 
Mara  was  treated  (1823)  by  Grosheim  (d.  1847);  and  Malibran  (1836) 
by  Isaac  Nathan  (d.  1864). 

Autobiographies  appeared  in  1830  (2  vols.)  by  the  singing-master  Jacopo 
Gotifredo  Ferrari  (d.  1842),  in  1833  by  the  organist  Rinck  (d.  1846),  and  in 
1834  by  the  singer  Blangini  (d.  1841). 

General  works  of  the  dictionary  class  were  published  in  1786  (much 
enlarged  after  1800)  by  Thomas  Busby  (d.  1838)  ; in  1801  (3  vols.,  much 
enlarged,  1820)  by  Pietro  Gianelli  (d.  1822?);  in  1810-n  (2  vols.)  by 
Fayolle  and  Choron;  in  1814-15  (4  vols.)  by  Giuseppe  Bertini  (d.  after 
1847)  j and  in  1812  (incomplete)  by  Franz  Xaver  Gloggl  (d.  1839). 

More  significant  were  a Bohemian  Kiinstlerlexikon  (3  vols.,  1815-8)  by 
Gottfried  Johann  Dlabacz  (d.  1820),  embodying  materials  collected  since 
about  1785  ; the  scholarly  encyclopaedia  and  bibliography  (4  vols.,  1826)  by 
Peter  Lichtenthal  (d.  1853)  ; and  a trade-list  of  books,  etc.  (from  1817)  by 
Carl  Friedrich  Whistling,  which  was  later  extended  by  others. 

Among  the  collections  of  folk-song  material  may  be  named  for  Wales 
those  of  the  clarinettist  and  critic  John  Parry  (d.  1851)  in  1810  and  after; 
for  Sweden  that  of  Erik  Gustaf  Geijer  (d.  1847)  and  Arvid  August  Afzelius 
(d.  1871)  in  1814-6  (3  vols.)  ; and  for  Galicia  that  of  the  violinist  Lipinski 
(d.  1861)  in  1834. 

Persistent  efforts  were  made  for  ten  years  from  1812  to  establish  a 
strong  musical  periodical  at  Vienna,  but  without  permanent  result.  In 
1824  Gottfried  Weber  (d.  1839)  founded  his  Cacilia  at  Mayence  and 
carried  it  on  with  incredible  industry  for  fifteen  years;  in  1842-8  it  was 
continued  by  Dehn.  Valuable  influence  was  exerted  during  1824-30  by 
the  Berliner  allgemeine  musikalische  Zeitung,  edited  by  Marx  (d.  1866). 
The  Eutonia  of  Breslau  and  Berlin,  devoted  to  music  in  schools,  lasted 
nine  years,  1828-37.  In  France  the  Revue  nmsicale  of  F^tis  (d.  1871) 


MUSICAL  LITERATURE 


495 


began  in  1827;  in  1834  it  was  merged  with  another  venture  into  the 
Revue  et  gazette  musicale , which  was  continued  ably  until  1880. 

In  England  the  initial  periodical  was  the  Quarterly  Musical  Magazine, 
founded  in  1818  by  Richard  Mackenzie  Bacon  (d.  1844),  which  appeared 
until  1829.  In  1823  William  Ayrton  (d.  1858),  a London  teacher  and 
critic,  founded  the  Harmotiicon,  which  also  persisted  for  about  a decade. 

Fortunato  Santini  (d.  1862),  a Roman  abbe  and  organist,  about  1800 
became  famous  as  a collector  and  copyist  of  rare  and  valuable  scores,  accumu- 
lating by  indefatigable  research  at  least  1000  works  representing  every  period, 
of  which  he  issued  a catalogue  (1820).  Many  of  his  copies  were  unique, 
because  scored  from  detached  parts  found  at  different  places.  He  himself 
composed  worthily  in  strict  style,  and  was  also  active  in  making  German 
music  and  musicians  known  in  Italy. 

In  Germany  important  libraries  were  collected  by  Georg  Polchau  of  Berlin 
(d.  1836),  which  became  the  nucleus  of  the  music  section  of  the  Royal 
Library,  and  by  A.  F.  J.  Thibaut  of  Heidelberg  (d.  1840),  the  latter  being 
peculiarly  rich  in  folk-music. 

A sure  evidence  of  the  increasing  popular  interest  in  music  was  the  growth 
of  the  business  of  publishing  and  selling  music.  The  early  decades  of  the 
century  saw  the  founding  of  many  houses  that  have  since  acquired  interna- 
tional fame.  Thus  at  Berlin  the  house  of  Schlesinger  was  started  in  1795, 
and  that  of  Trautwein  in  1820.  In  Leipsic  the  firm  of  Peters  was  developed  in 
1814  out  of  an  earlier  enterprise.  In  Hamburg  the  house  of  Cranz  was 
founded  in  1813,  and  that  of  Schuberth  in  1826,  with  a Leipsic  branch  from 
1832.  In  Vienna  Antonio  Diabelli  (d.  1858),  a pupil  of  Michael  Haydn,  in 
1824  formed  the  firm  known  by  his  name;  similarly  Tobias  Haslinger  (d. 
1842),  a pupil  of  Gloggl,  after  many  years  as  a subordinate,  in  1826  was 
advanced  to  proprietorship.  At  Milan  the  now  famous  house  of  Ricordi 
began  in  1808  very  modestly  under  Giovanni  Ricordi  (d.  1853),  who  had 
studied  engraving  at  Leipsic.  At  Paris  the  firm  of  Richault  was  established 
in  1805,  and  that  of  Schlesinger  in  1823  by  the  eldest  son  of  the  Berlin 
publisher.  In  London  the  great  business  of  Novello  had  its  start  in  1811 
under  Vincent  Novello  (d.  1861),  a good  composer  and  editor  of  sacred 
music,  with  which  in  1867  was  united  that  of  Ewer,  founded  in  1820;  that 
of  Chappell  in  1812  ; that  of  Boosey  in  1816 ; and  that  of  Cocks  in  1823. 

188.  Summary  of  the  Period. — The  first  third  of  the  19th 
century  had  close  connections  with  both  the  period  before  and 
the  period  following.  It  witnessed  the  crowning  achievements 
of  the  Viennese  school  which  began  under  Haydn,  and  was 
therefore  the  time  when  the  ‘classical’  movement  attained  its 
strongest  expression.  But  it  was  also  the  birth-time  of  the 
4 romantic  ’ movement,  the  most  characteristic  embodiments  of 
which  were  to  start  from  other  centres  than  Vienna.  In  some 
sense  the  former  movement  was  expressive  of  the  general  spirit 


496 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


of  the  1 8th  century,  while  the  latter  was  equally  expressive  of 
that  of  the  19th.  But  it  may  also  be  said  that  the  ‘classical’ 
attention  to  form  and  method  was  a necessary  stage  in  artistic 
development,  a stage  that  was  indispensable  before  the  * ro- 
mantic ’ exaltation  of  personal  mood  and  fancy  could  proceed 
with  freedom.  The  earlier  emphasis  was  not  so  much  the  result 
of  an  age  of  formalism  and  externality  as  an  instinctive  attempt 
to  master  the  mechanism  of  artistic  embodiment,  without  which 
free  creation  cannot  be  confident  and  sure. 

Broadly  judged,  the  period  seems  most  notable  for  its  fruitful- 
ness in  instrumental  writing,  being  in  this  respect  the  direct 
consequent  of  the  Haydn-Mozart  age.  For  both  the  piano  and 
the  orchestral  ensemble,  large  and  small,  Beethoven  stands  out 
as  altogether  the  most  powerful  and  prophetic  genius,  his  great- 
ness being  so  impressive  that  it  dominates  the  picture  of  the 
whole  period.  The  vocal  productions  of  the  time  have  proved 
less  enduring  save  only  in  the  case  of  Schubert’s  songs  and 
Lowe’s  earlier  ballades,  but  these  represented  an  artistic  move- 
ment as  yet  not  widespread.  There  were,  of  course,  several  lines 
of  operatic  enterprise  in  vigorous  operation,  but  none  of  these, 
not  even  the  brilliant  innovations  of  Weber,  can  be  said  to 
have  acquired  definite  directive  influence  before  1830.  The 
various  types  of  opera,  however,  were  plainly  struggling  toward 
new  ideals,  so  that  the  way  was  being  prepared  for  fresh  con- 
structive advance.  Sacred  music  was  probably  less  important 
than  in  any  previous  age,  even  the  limited  revival  of  German 
organ  music  lacking  in  creative  vigor. 

The  musical  world  at  this  juncture  was  somewhat  full  of 
startling  contrasts.  At  precisely  the  same  time,  and  sometimes 
side  by  side  in  the  same  place,  diverse  types  of  art  and  art- 
ists competed  for  attention  and  applause.  It  is  hard  to  conceive, 
for  example,  of  a more  glaring  antithesis  than  that  between  the 
gigantic  and  passionately  serious  spirit  of  Beethoven  and  the 
heartless  sensationalism  of  Rossini.  Various  other  pairs  of 
contemporaries  are  almost  equally  impossible  to  classify  together 
— such  as  Rinck  and  Paganini,  to  take  a somewhat  bizarre  in- 
stance. The  coincident  vogue  of  styles  so  divergent  as  the 
French  opera  comique,  the  new  German  romantic  opera  and  the 
more  flamboyant  of  Italian  works  commands  a degree  of  wonder. 
The  local  juxtaposition  of  Beethoven  and  Schubert  at  Vienna, 


SUMMARY  OF  THE  PERIOD 


497 


almost  without  personal  contact,  or  of  Weber  and  Morlacchi  at 
Dresden,  or  of  Cherubini  and  Spontini  at  Paris,  stimulates  in- 
quiry and  surprise.  The  truth  seems  to  be  that  the  musical 
world  was  awaking  to  a new  breadth  of  activity,  was  putting 
forth  energy  in  many  directions  at  once,  and  was  passing 
through  a time  when  no  one  influence  was  generally  recognized 
as  dominant  enough  to  serve  as  a unifying  centre. 

Yet  it  is  clear  that  in  this  period  certain  lines  of  effort  were 
pushing  into  significant  importance.  One  of  these  was  the 
development  of  piano  technique,  especially  under  the  influence 
of  Clementi  and  his  followers.  Here  preparation  was  being 
made  for  the  epochal  achievements  of  a series  of  pianistic  mas- 
ters in  the  next  period.  Another  was  the  discovery  of  how  to 
make  free  application  of  the  orchestra  to  the  portrayal  of 
emotion  and  passion  in  dramatic  connections,  especially  exem- 
plified by  the  gifted  Weber.  This  plainly  foreshadowed  not 
only  the  interesting  later  growth  of  the  historical  opera,  but 
also  the  extraordinary  innovations  of  Wagner.  Still  another 
was  the  uncovering  of  the  hidden  resources  of  the  song  as  a 
medium  of  intimate  self-expression,  accomplished  chiefly  through 
the  unconscious  and  unostentatious  impulse  of  Schubert.  Out 
of  this  grew  immediately  an  efflorescence  of  song-writing  that 
gave  fragrance  and  beauty  to  the  whole  field  of  musical  art,  re- 
acting upon  instrumental  style  as  well  as  vocal. 

In  the  matter  of  tools,  the  practical  completion  of  the  piano 
was  an  event  of  capital  importance,  providing  an  instrument 
remarkably  efficient  for  both  private  and  public  use.  The 
steps  in  the  process  of  improvement  were  taken  so  gradually 
that  their  full  value  was  not  at  once  seen.  Certainly  the  per- 
fected piano,  with  its  iron  frame,  its  steel  strings  and  its  ex- 
tremely powerful  and  responsive  action,  supplied  to  the  next 
period  an  implement  of  performance  of  which  the  18th  century 
could  hardly  have  more  than  dreamed. 

On  the  sides  of  theory,  research  and  pedagogy  this  period 
should  not  be  treated  apart  from  that  which  followed  (see  secs. 
225-228).  We  may  simply  note  that  here  began  the  shaping 
of  the  modern  doctrine  of  harmony,  the  scholarly  investigation 
of  many  questions  of  aesthetic,  critical  or  historical  importance, 
the  organization  of  several  of  the  many  influential  conserva- 
tories, the  better  systemization  of  instruction  in  technical 


2 K 


498 


THE  EARLY  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


branches,  and  the  first  definite  experiments  with  music  as  a 
topic  of  public  school  instruction. 

Throughout  the  18th  century  the  profession  of  music  acquired 
social  status  most  often  through  the  favor  of  courts  and  of  wealthy 
or  titled  patrons.  From  the  opening  of  the  19th,  this  dependent 
and  somewhat  servile  relation  gradually  became  less  typical. 
Music  was  working  toward  independence,  so  that  it  might  ap- 
peal to  public  respect  not  simply  as  an  appendage  of  a luxurious 
or  privileged  class,  but  as  one  of  the  aspects  of  general  popular 
culture. 


PART  VIII 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


PART  VIII 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


Chap.  XXX.  Schumann  and  Ro- 
manticism. 

189.  General  Survey. 

190.  The  Career  of  Schumann. 

191.  His  Work  as  Composer. 

192.  His  Work  as  Critic. 

193.  Leipsic  as  a Literary  Centre. 

Chap.  XXXI.  Mendelssohn  and 
the  Leipsic  Circle. 

194.  Mendelssohn’s  Usefulness. 

195.  His  Works  and  Style. 

196.  The  Gewandhaus  Orchestra 

and  the  Leipsic  Conserva- 
tory. 

197.  Certain  Other  Leipsic  Mas- 

ters. 

Chap.  XXXII.  New  Lights  upon 

PlANISM. 

198.  Chopin  as  a Tone-Poet. 

199.  Salon  Music. 

200.  The  Bravura  Pianists. 

201.  Liszt  and  the  Orchestral 

Style. 

202.  Rubinstein  and  Bulow. 

Chap.  XXXIII.  The  Opera  aside 
from  Wagner. 

203.  Verdi  and  the  Italians. 

204.  Development  of  the  Opera 

Comique. 

205 . Austrian  and  German  Opera. 

Chap.  XXXIV.  Wagner  and  the 
Reconstruction  of  the  Opera. 

206.  The  Situation  Confronting 


207.  Growth  of  his  Artistic  Ideal. 

208.  Influence  of  his  Views. 

209.  The  Dresden  Circle. 

210.  Liszt  and  the  Weimar  Circle. 

Chap.  XXXV.  Symphonists  and 
Instrumentalists. 

2 1 1 . Competing  Orchestral 

Ideals. 

212.  The  Work  of  Berlioz. 

213.  Some  Conservative  Leaders. 

214.  Liberal  Tendencies  in  Aus- 

tria and  Russia. 

215.  Famous  Violinists  and  ’Cel- 

lists. 

216.  Other  Instrumentalists. 

217.  Waltz  Music. 

Chap.  XXXVI.  Choral  Music. 
The  Song.  The  English  School. 

218.  The  Revival  of  Choral 

Music. 

219.  The  Berlin  Circle. 

220.  Organ  Music. 

221.  Catholic  Music. 

222.  The  Song  and  Ballade. 

223.  Music  in  England. 

224.  Music  in  America. 

Chap.  XXXVII.  Musical  Educa- 
tion and  Literature. 

225.  The  Conservatories. 

226.  Certain  Pedagogical  Special- 

ties. 

227.  Historical  Studies. 

228.  Theorists  and  Critics. 

229.  Summary  of  the  Period. 


CHAPTER  XXX 


SCHUMANN  AND  ROMANTICISM 

189.  General  Survey.  — The  middle  third  of  the  19th  century 
is  often  designated  as  the  ‘ romantic  ’ period,  since  in  it  worked 
several  of  the  strongest  exponents  of  the  romantic  movement  as 
applied  to  music,  and  since  the  trend  of  all  composition  was  con- 
sciously or  unconsciously  away  from  studied  adherence  to 
‘classical’ practice.  That  romanticism  should  take  hold  upon 
musical  art  was  inevitable  in  an  age  when  individuality  was  for 
the  first  time  claiming  its  rights  on  the  largest  scale,  but  it  is  also 
true  that  music  could  not  further  advance  without  becoming  much 
more  romantic  than  it  had  been.  Its  very  nature  as  an  art  for- 
bade its  being  always  confined  within  the  limitations  of  academic 
aesthetics.  Romanticism  in  music  was  no  new  discovery  with 
the  period  here  considered.  Certainly  much  of  the  best  work  of 
the  preceding  period  had  been  emphatically  romantic  in  spirit 
and  style,  and  truly  romantic  qualities  may  be  traced  more  or 
less  in  still  earlier  periods.  Yet  in  the  mental  attitude  of  an 
original  critic  and  leader  like  Schumann  and  in  a type  of  genius 
like  Chopin’s,  for  example,  we  encounter  an  intensity  of  romantic 
warmth  that  is  new.  Beginning  about  1830,  there  were  so  many 
musicians  that  were  moved  by  this  spirit  that  they  gave  to  their 
time  a peculiar  quality  that  may  well  be  distinguished  from  that 
of  any  preceding  time. 

In  the  fine  arts  generally,  1 classical 1 and  ‘ romantic 1 are  terms  whose 
meaning  is  largely  relative  to  each  other.  But  they  also  have  a certain 
amount  of  absolute  meaning.  Both  may  refer  either  to  the  spirit  or  pur- 
pose with  which  the  artist  approaches  his  work  or  to  the  formal  qualities 
of  the  work  itself. 

The  aim  in  classical  art  is  to  realize  an  ideal  beauty  which  is  not 
necessarily  attached  to  the  artist’s  personality  and  has  significance  some- 
what as  a universal  type.  Works  in  the  classical  spirit  are  objectively 
beautiful,  commending  themselves  even  when  the  percipient  regards  them 
as  if  they  were  simply  impersonal  things.  The  production  of  classical  art 
is  apt  to  be  largely  governed  by  rules  or  formulae,  the  observance  of  which 

501 


502 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


constitutes  a sort  of  artistic  ritual,  so  that  it  not  seldom  becomes  academic 
and  even  mechanical.  Its  products  are  generally  marked  by  qualities  like 
clarity,  symmetry,  restraint,  repose,  and  a finish  of  detail  that  is  as  nearly 
as  possible  final. 

The  aim  of  romantic  art,  on  the  other  hand,  is  to  present  some  product 
of  imagination  or  depiction  of  mood  or  other  embodiment  of  personality, 
which  is  unusual  in  character  or  intensity,  and  the  beauty  of  which  largely 
inheres  in  the  emotion  felt  over  it  by  the  artist  and  by  the  sympathetic 
observer.  Works  in  the  romantic  spirit,  therefore,  are  subjectively 
beautiful,  impressive  more  or  less  in  proportion  as  they  are  consciously 
felt  to  be  personal  and  intimate,  involving  a high  degree  of  imaginative 
or  sensitive  sympathy.  The  production  of  romantic  art  is  distinctly 
impatient  of  rules  and  models,  since  in  it  individuality  is  always  exalted. 
Hence  its  products  escape  all  simple  classification,  and  sometimes  run  to 
extremes  of  obscurity,  irregularity,  whimsicality,  passion,  and  to  a choice 
of  topic  or  treatment  that  is  a surprise  or  a challenge. 

The  rise  of  romanticism  in  music  was  undoubtedly  stimulated 
by  literary  romanticism,  a movement  which  affected  leading 
countries  of  Europe  in  different  ways  and  not  exactly  at  the  same 
time,  but  which  was  at  its  height  in  Germany  and  France  about 
1830  and  after.  But  literary  romanticism  made  much  of  a choice 
of  topics  distant  from  common  experience  — a feature  inappli- 
cable to  music  except  in  the  opera.  A broader  statement  is  that 
all  romanticism  is  an  attempt  to  get  away  from  the  typical  to  the 
peculiar,  from  the  conventional  to  the  picturesque,  and  is  really  a 
phase  of  the  modern  desire  to  exalt  the  individual  in  his  tastes, 
fancies,  moods  and  experiences.  This  at  least  is  true  of  musical 
romanticism.  The  movement  toward  a fuller  recognition  of  indi- 
vidual rights  had  long  been  gathering  strength,  and,  beginning 
with  the  French  Revolution  of  1792,  it  forced  the  progressive 
reconstruction  of  European  politics  and  society.  The  process 
was  most  conspicuous  in  the  manifold  and  severe  upheavals  in 
government  that  filled  the  middle  of  the  century  with  ferment, 
disorder  and  war.  But  it  declared  itself  as  well  in  a novel  inde- 
pendence and  enterprise  in  every  domain  of  thought  and  science. 

In  the  political  world  France  still  held  the  centre  of  the  stage,  though, 
in  the  delicate  balance  of  European  affairs,  more  as  an  occasion  or  initia- 
tive of  disturbance  than  as  an  arbiter.  The  French  Revolutions  of  1830, 
which  brought  in  Louis  Philippe  as  ‘citizen-king,1  and  of  1848,  which 
drove  him  out,  were  signals  for  complicated  outbreaks  elsewhere,  all 
tending  to  assert  the  rights  of  the  people  at  large,  or  of  subject  states,  to 
self-government.  Thus,  after  1830,  Poland  made  a fierce,  but  unsuccess- 
ful, effort  to  throw  off  the  tyranny  of  Russia,  while  in  England  a series  of 


GENERAL  SURVEY 


503 


drastic  reforms  were  enacted  by  legislation.  After  1 848,  a fever  of  revolu- 
tion spread  through  central  Europe.  In  self-defense  the  ruling  powers 
drew  together  in  coalitions,  but  in  so  doing  were  obliged  to  grant  popu- 
lar guarantees,  such  as  the  Prussian  Constitution  of  1850.  Every  royal 
house  felt  in  danger  and  strove  to  repress  republican  and  socialistic 
demands.  Among  the  greater  states,  Prussia  pushed  steadily  to  the 
front,  while  Austria  tightened  her  grip  on  Hungary  and  Italy  in  spite  of 
fiery  patriotic  revolts.  In  1851,  by  the  famous  ‘Coup  d’Etat,1  the  new 
French  Empire  was  setup  under  Napoleon  III.  In  1853-6  occurred  the 
exhausting  Crimean  War,  fought  by  England  and  France  in  defense  of 
Turkey  against  Russia.  In  1859  France  and  Austria  clashed  over  Italy. 
In  1866  Prussia  made  the  triumphant  display  of  strength  against  Austria 
which  began  the  consolidation  of  Germany.  Upon  the  heels  of  this 
came  the  Franco-Prussian  War  of  1870-1,  which  united  all  Germany  into 
an  Empire.  These  last  two  wars  indirectly  led  to  the  freedom  and  union 
of  Italy  in  1871.  Meanwhile  the  British  Empire  was  steadily  advancing 
in  power,  especially  because  of  its  great  colonial  possessions  in  India, 
Canada  and  Australia.  And  the  United  States  was  gradually  acquiring 
its  present  vast  territory,  being  finally  consolidated  by  the  bloody  Civil 
War  of  1861-5. 

The  principal  rulers  of  the  period  were,  in  France,  Louis  Philippe 
(1830-48)  and  Napoleon  III.  (1852-70)  ; in  Prussia,  Frederick  William 
IV.  (1840-61)  and  William  I.  (1861-88,  Emperor  from  1871);  in 
Austria,  Ferdinand  I.  (1835-48)  and  Francis  Joseph  (1848-  ); 

in  England,  William  IV.  (1830-7)  and  Victoria  (1837-1901);  and  in 
Russia,  Nicholas  I.  (1825-55)  and  Alexander  II.  (1855-81). 

The  period  in  music  was  not  dominated  by  a single  composer 
as  the  preceding  period  had  been  by  Beethoven.  Yet  several 
leaders  appeared  whose  closeness  of  practical  touch  was  even 
greater  than  Beethoven’s.  Among  these  was  Meyerbeer,  who 
for  a time  continued  to  be  the  central  figure  in  the  operatic  field. 
Outside  of  this  field,  but  potent  in  every  other,  was  the  indefati- 
gable and  versatile  Mendelssohn,  especially  notable  for  his  ser- 
vices to  the  cause  of  musical  education.  In  the  domain  of 
criticism  and  especially  as  the  spokesman  of  the  romantic  spirit 
in  the  best  sense,  Schumann  held  a unique  position,  besides 
being  an  original  composer  of  marked  power.  From  about 
1840  the  immense  vigor  and  genial  magnetism  of  Liszt  advanced 
him  into  a sort  of  imperial  leadership,  which,  however,  he  was 
magnanimous  enough  gradually  to  transfer  to  Wagner,  the  time 
of  whose  greatest  public  power  did  not  arrive  until  after  i860. 
Still  more  than  in  any  previous  period,  the  eminence  of  Germany 
declared  itself,  though  as  the  period  closed  it  was  evident  that 
other  countries  were  awaking  to  new  musical  life. 


504 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


190.  The  Career  of  Schumann.  — Although  at  the  outset  of  the 
period  Schumann  was  an  unknown  quantity,  the  rapidity  of  his 
development  and  his  work  both  as  critic  and  as  composer  revealed 
him  as  a significant  romantic  force.  Hence,  though  with  some 
distortion  of  chronological  truth,  he  may  well  be  cited  at  once 
as  an  exponent  of  the  spirit  of  the  time. 

In  him,  as  in  his  close  contemporary  Mendelssohn,  came  out, 
as  never  before,  the  value  of  general  culture  in  union  with  mu- 
sical genius.  His  mind  was  broadly  educated  and  his  outlook 
upon  music  was  not  simply  that  of  the  executive  artist.  He  had 
gifts  as  an  original  thinker  and  a forcible  writer.  His  location 
at  Leipsic  put  him  in  touch  with  the  intellectual  movements  of 
the  age.  Though  his  work  as  composer  was  late  in  maturing, 
was  imperfect  in  detail,  and  was  not  at  once  appreciated,  he  yet 
represented  his  time  in  important  regards.  He  now  seems  to 
have  been  greater  than  his  contemporaries  knew.  At  all  events, 
he  merits  careful  consideration  as  a noble  illustration  of  what  was 
happening  in  the  musical  world. 

Robert  Schumann  (d.  1856)  was  born  in  1810  at  Zwickau,  a Saxon  manu- 
facturing town,  the  son  of  a bookseller,  author  and  translator,  his  mother  be- 
ing a doctor’s  daughter,  hardly  her  husband’s  equal  in  culture.  From  his 
father  he  derived  a strong  taste  for  reading,  skill  in  writing  and  a useful 
knowledge  of  the  book-trade.  From  his  mother  came  a marked  sensibility 
and  sentimentality,  which  showed  itself  in  all  the  five  children,  of  whom  he 
was  the  youngest,  and  developed  in  them  all  into  some  degree  of  mental  un- 
balance. His  early  education  was  desultory.  He  was  extremely  vivacious,  a 
universal  favorite  and  a leader  among  his  fellows.  At  7 he  had  already  shown 
musical  aptitude,  liberally  fostered  by  his  father.  Before  he  was  1 2 he  had 
read  much  music,  had  organized  a school-boy  orchestra,  had  essayed  composi- 
tion, and  was  locally  noted  as  a pianist,  though  he  had  had  no  good  instruction. 
About  14  his  character  suddenly  changed  to  decided  dreaminess  and  reticence. 
He  became  a devotee  of  the  mystic  writer  Richter  (‘Jean  Paul’)  and  in- 
dulged in  much  imaginative  fantasy.  At  16  he  lost  his  father,  and  his  mother 
determined  to  make  him  a lawyer.  She  sent  him  to  Leipsic  to  study,  but 
there  he  became  so  much  engaged  in  music,  with  lessons  from  the  sterling 
teacher  Wieck,  with  eager  enthusiasm  for  Schubert’s  works,  and  with  some  social 
vogue  as  an  improviser,  that  at  20  he  was  transferred  to  Heidelberg  and  then 
sent  on  a trip  to  Italy.  At  length,  however,  what  he  humorously  called  ‘ the 
twenty-years’  war  ’ ended  in  his  mother’s  consent  that  he  should  take  music  as 
a life-work. 

In  1830  he  returned  to  Leipsic,  and  sought  under  Wieck  and  other  teachers 
to  repair  the  defects  of  his  early  training.  His  initial  ambition  was  to  become 
a piano-virtuoso,  and  he  began  such  strenuous  practice,  aided  by  a device  to 


SCHUMANN 


505 


free  the  fourth  finger,  that  presently  he  permanently  crippled  his  right  hand. 
He  then  turned  to  composition,  at  first  wholly  for  the  piano,  and  plunged  into 
arduous  technical  discipline  under  Dorn.  He  also  soon  appeared  as  a critic, 
writing  a florid  article  in  1831  about 
Chopin,  then  just  becoming  known  at 
Paris.  He  drew  about  him  a group  of 
enthusiasts  whose  purpose  was  to  op- 
pose ‘ Philistinism  ■ in  music  (whatever 
they  felt  was  commonplace,  academic, 
dry),  and  whom  he  hence  dubbed  the 
i Davidsbund.1  So  urgent  was  his  ac- 
tivity that  in  1834,  in  company  with 
two  or  three  others,  he  founded  the 
Neue  Zeitschrift  fur  Musik  as  the 
organ  of  advanced  ideas,  continuing 
as  its  editor  till  1844  and  as  a contrib- 
utor still  longer.  Through  this  jour- 
nal his  vigorous,  fearless  and  broad- 
minded attitude  became  manifest  and 
influential.  In  1835  Mendelssohn  came 
to  Leipsic,  and  he  and  Schumann  were 
intimate,  Schumann,  at  least,  with  the 
most  cordial  appreciation.  In  1836  began  his  romantic  courtship  of  Clara 
Wieck,  then  17  years  old,  whom  he  knew  intimately  because  living  in  the 
Wieck  household.  She  was  already  a pianist  of  the  first  rank,  and  was  com- 
ing into  a beautiful  and  noble  womanhood.  Her  father  opposed  the  match 
because  uncertain  of  Schumann’s  prospects,  and  only  in  1840  was  compelled 
by  legal  pressure  to  give  his  consent.  Meanwhile,  in  1838-9,  Schumann 
spent  most  of  a year  at  Vienna,  hoping  to  find  there  a better  opening  for  his 
Zeitschrift , and  incidentally  unearthing  many  of  Schubert’s  neglected  scores. 
During  these  years  his  creative  faculty  became  more  evident  and  his  piano- 
works  grew  in  variety  and  power.  From  1840,  the  year  of  his  marriage,  for 
several  years  he  put  forth  his  full  energy  as  a composer.  In  that  year  he  was 
chiefly  occupied  upon  some  150  songs,  in  1841  upon  orchestral  composition, 
in  1842  upon  chamber  works,  and  in  1843  upon  the  first  of  his  larger  vocal 
works.  In  1843,  when  Mendelssohn  organized  the  Leipsic  conservatory, 
Schumann  was  one  of  the  original  faculty,  teaching  piano  and  composition, 
though  greatly  hampered  by  his  extreme  reticence.  Until  1844  his  life  was  so 
absorbed  in  study  as  to  be  almost  devoid  of  public  incident.  He  was  seldom 
away  from  Leipsic,  but  early  in  1844  he  and  his  wife  made  a brilliant  tour  to 
Russia. 

The  mental  strain  of  ten  years  of  intense  application  now  brought  on  a 
nervous  breakdown,  and  in  the  fall  of  1844  Schumann  moved  to  Dresden,  where 
he  gradually  recovered.  Here  he  was  thrown  into  intimacy  with  Hiller  and 
somewhat  with  Wagner.  He  was  able  by  degrees  to  resume  even  extended 
composition,  including  in  1848  the  opera  Genoveva  (not  given  till  1850)  and 
his  Faust  music  (given  in  1849  on  the  centenary  of  Goethe’s  birth).  Espe- 
cially from  1849  for  a period  his  ability  to  work  returned  in  full.  From  1847 


5o6 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


he  succeeded  Hiller  as  conductor  of  a male  chorus  and  later  of  a small  mixed 
chorus,  writing  somewhat  for  both.  In  1850  he  was  made  director  at  Dussel- 
dorf,  again  in  succession  to  Hiller.  Though  he  and  his  wife  were  received 
with  enthusiasm  and  he  began  his  work  with  high  hope,  his  strength  was  un- 
equal to  the  task  and  his  methods  were  so  ineffective  that  late  in  1853  he  was 
virtually  displaced.  He  continued  active,  however,  in  composition  in  vari- 
ous forms,  and  made  some  artistic  trips  with  his  wife.  Thus,  for  example, 
they  were  twice  welcomed  with  acclaim  in  Holland,  and  in  March,  1852,  a 
cycle  of  his  works  was  given  in  Leipsic.  But  from  about  1852  he  was  in- 
creasingly subject  to  attacks  of  extreme  mental  depression,  combined  with 
startling  vagaries  of  fancy  and  auditory  illusions.  Early  in  1854,  at  Diissel- 
dorf,  he  one  day  stole  away  from  his  home  and  threw  himself  into  the  Rhine, 
but  was  rescued  by  some  boatmen.  It  was  now  clear  that  his  mind  had  per- 
manently given  way,  and  he  was  cared  for  in  a private  asylum  at  Endenich 
(near  Bonn)  until  his  death  in  1856.  He  was  buried  at  Bonn,  where  in  1880 
a statue  was  erected  in  his  honor. 

His  sincere  and  kindly  nature  revealed  itself  in  his  frank  and  noble  face. 
Though  usually  extremely  silent,  especially  with  strangers,  he  was  keenly 
observant  and  almost  clairvoyant  in  his  estimation  of  character.  At  home 
and  among  his  few  intimates  he  was  often  bright  and  witty.  Every  one  felt 
the  guileless  exaltation  of  his  personality  and  the  vigorous  independence  of  his 
intellect.  He  was  respected  even  where  he  was  but  partially  understood. 
In  writing  he  expressed  himself  with  wonderful  freedom  and  force,  as  his 
many  letters  and  critical  works  show.  This  literary  gift,  joined  with  his 
fertility  as  a composer,  made  him  known  far  better  than  he  could  ever  be 
through  speech.  He  was  greatly  drawn  to  young  people,  especially  if  they  had 
aspirations,  and  he  detected  the  promise  of  artistic  achievement  with  amazing 
accuracy  and  sympathy.  He  was  entirely  free  from  jealousy  or  envy,  but  had 
a proper  sense  of  his  own  dignity  and  power.  His  family  life  with  his 
devoted  wife  and  his  five  children  was  in  every  way  ideal. 

191.  His  Work  as  Composer.  — Schumann  began  his  active 
musical  career  somewhat  late  and  without  thorough  discipline. 
Hence,  as  his  life  was  short  and  at  the  end  broken  by  physical 
disability,  his  creative  period  was  hardly  more  than  fifteen 
years  (1832-51,  with  breaks  after  1844).  Hence,  too,  he  was 
obliged  to  make  up  defects  in  training  by  the  most  concen- 
trated study.  Only  a mind  of  great  endowments  could  have 
accomplished  so  much  in  this  short  time. 

From  the  outset  his  style  showed  rare  originality  and  fullness. 
He  was  often  careless  about  exact  form,  seemed  to  be  trying 
experiments  with  patterns,  harmonies  and  styles,  and  was  not 
always  perfectly  at  home  in  the  idioms  of  expression.  Some  of 
his  works  are  over-crowded  with  matter  and  over-strenuous  in 
treatment.  His  marked  tempi  and  his  other  indications  of  ex- 


SCHUMANN 


50; 


pression  often  seem  extreme.  Yet  in  spite  of  all  drawbacks, 
the  affluence  of  ideas,  the  impetuosity  of  sentiment,  the  variety 
of  imaginative  suggestion,  and  the  positive  beauty  of  conception 
are  on  the  whole  most  impressive,  especially  when  considered 
in  relation  to  the  time  in  which  they  appeared.  Into  the  circle 
of  precisians  and  pedants  Schumann  came  as  a thorough  revo- 
lutionist, but  his  purpose  was  not  destructive  or  unsympathetic 
with  the  past.  He  simply  sought  to  widen  the  range  of  musi- 
cal utterance  in  the  direction  of  vivid  personal  revelation.  In 
this  he  resembled  Beethoven,  though  he  lacked  Beethoven’s 
instinct  for  style,  depth  of  pathetic  experience  and  ecstatic 
ideality.  Schumann’s  strenuousness  was  not  that  born  of  pain, 
but  the  voice  of  restless  mental  energy.  It  is  not  strange  that 
the  full  sense  of  his  greatness  came  slowly  and  has  not  been 
universal  among  music-lovers.  Yet  he  is  a foremost  illustration 
of  the  connection  of  modern  music  with  the  spirit  of  modern 
life  — versatile,  eager  and  full  of  vitality. 

Schumann’s  compositions  belong  to  almost  every  principal  class  except 
church  music.  It  is  impossible  to  classify  them  briefly,  since  many  of 
the  most  characteristic  are  extremely  varied  and  novel  in  form.  For  the 
piano  alone  may  be  cited  the  Papillons  (1831),  a toccata  (1833),  the 
Etudes  syinphoniques  (1834),  the  Carnaval  (1835),  3 sonatas  (1835-8), 
the  Novelletten  (1838),  a concerto  (1841-5),  considerable  4-hand  work, 
including  the  Bilder  aus  Osten  (1848),  and  a multitude  of  characteristic 
pieces  of  every  kind ; for  the  piano  with  strings,  the  Fantasiestucke 
(1842),  a quartet  and  quintet  (1842),  3 trios  (1847-51),  many  pieces  for 
a solo  instrument  with  piano  (1849)52  violin-sonatas  (1851),  and  some 
other  chamber  works  ; for  orchestra,  4 symphonies,  from  the  ‘ Spring 1 
(1841)  to  the  1 Rhenish’  (1850),  one  other  symphonic  work,  and  4 
concert-overtures  (1850-3);  the  opera  Genoveva  (1848),  and  many 
scenes  for  Faust  (1844-50)  and  for  Manfred  (1848)  ; the  cantatas  Das 
Paradies  mid  die  Peri  (1843),  Advent  lied  (1848),  Nachtlied  (1849), 
Neujahrslied  (1850),  Der  Rose  Pilgerfahrt  (1851),  and  several  choral 
ballades  ; many  part-songs  and  choruses  ; almost  250  songs,  many  of 
them  arranged  in  cycles  of  extreme  interest  (from  1840).  He  wrote 
several  series  of  pieces  for  children  or  about  them,  many  that  concern 
nature,  many  full  of  the  excitement  and  intrigue  of  society,  many  instinct 
with  the  warmth  of  German  patriotism,  many  charged  with  poetic  mys- 
ticism — indeed,  the  circle  of  sentiments  represented  is  much  too  large 
to  be  described. 

In  many  of  the  earlier  works  for  the  piano  there  are  fictitious  names  or 
cabalistic  signs  attached  which  are  the  same  that  were  more  freely  used 
in  the  literary  works  (see  sec.  192). 


508 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


Schumann’s  style  marks  an  epoch  because  in  it  for  the  first 
time,  at  least  on  a broad  scale,  the  details  of  form  are  not  so  much 
derived  from  established  rules  or  formulae  as  freshly  generated 
from  the  necessities  of  the  idea  or  sentiment.  Form,  in  short, 
is  made  distinctly  the  servant  of  imagination,  rather  than  a 
mould  to  which  imagination  must  conform.  Hence  in  every 
direction  Schumann  enlarged  the  scope  of  technical  procedure, 
presenting  novel  melodic  figures  and  phrase-plans,  stretching 
the  processes  of  harmonic  sequence  and  modulation,  devising 
intricate  time-figures  (carrying  syncopation,  for  example,  to 
excess),  and  searching  for  new  colors  and  contrasts  of  quality 
and  effect.  All  this  was  not  the  token  of  technical  restlessness, 
but  simply  the  fruit  of  exuberant  imagination.  Schumann’s 
mind  was  phenomenally  sensitive  to  impressions  from  persons, 
scenes  and  fancies,  and  for  every  vivid  impression  he  strove  to 
find  a genuine  musical  expression.  The  topics  that  attracted 
him  were  amazingly  varied,  but  always  of  an  elevated  and  noble 
class.  There  is  a marked  absence  of  the  abnormal  and  morbid. 
The  marks  of  culture  and  spiritual  distinction  are  everywhere 
to  be  seen.  He  clearly  discerned  the  possibilities  of  music  as 
an  embodiment  of  the  human  spirit  in  its  freest  play  of  fancy, 
and  his  own  endowments  were  so  ample  that  he  was  able  to 
open  many  new  paths  into  inexhaustible  fields  of  beauty. 

On  the  formal  side  Schumann’s  style  is  strikingly  unconnected  with 
that  of  the  Haydn-Mozart  period.  It  presents  many  points  of  kinship 
with  both  Beethoven  and  Bach,  for  both  of  whom  Schumann  had  the 
deepest  reverence.  His  relation  to  them,  however,  was  not  imitative,  for 
temperamentally  he  was  diverse  from  both.  He  resembled  Weber 
probably  more  than  any  preceding  master,  though  his  genius  was  not 
dramatically,  but  lyrically,  centred. 

Among  his  works  those  for  the  piano  are  the  most  spontaneous, 
especially  the  briefer  ones.  The  interest  of  compressed,  vivid  sketches 
in  tone  had  already  been  perceived  by  Field,  and  the  keyboard  song  and 
the  etherealized  dance  were  being  beautifully  treated  by  several,  but  in 
emotional  picturesque  ness  Schumann  stands  alone.  In  his  longer  piano- 
works,  however,  he  belongs  with  those  who  were  beginning  to  develop 
the  orchestral  capacity  of  the  instrument.  All  his  instrumental  writing, 
though  often  full  of  technical  difficulty,  proceeds  less  from  the  technical 
than  the  ideal  point  of  view.  He  does  not  seek  to  display  the  genius 
of  the  instrument  for  its  own  sake,  but  to  load  its  tones  with  general 
musical  significance.  The  same  is  true  of  his  handling  of  vocal  effects. 
In  many  cases  his  compression  of  style  is  almost  extreme. 


SCHUMANN 


509 


By  common  consent  the  best  of  his  songs,  certain  of  his  chamber  works 
and  a few  for  the  orchestra  are  regarded  as  the  strongest  utterances 
in  their  respective  classes  in  the  period  following  Beethoven  and  Schu- 
bert. In  the  terse  form  of  the  song,  including  some  works  for  chorus, 
his  genius  was  thoroughly  at  home.  Here  and  in  writing  for  the  chamber 
ensemble,  he  loved  to  fill  every  detail  with  meaning,  so  that  the  entire 
structure  is  vital  and  animated.  In  consequence,  his  practice  prefigured 
the  most  modern  type  of  polyphony  — far  removed  from  the  old  strict- 
ness, but  for  its  purposes  fully  as  legitimate.  His  mastery  of  orchestral 
technique  and  of  the  conditions  of  dramatic  effect  was  not  complete,  yet 
the  wealth  of  idea,  the  richness  of  total  conception  and  the  splendor  of 
color  in  many  movements  cannot  be  denied. 

Schumann  left  hardly  any  who  can  be  called  direct  disciples 
except,  perhaps,  his  wife,  though  there  were  several  young  art- 
ists who  were  closely  attached  to  him  and  derived  much  from 
him.  As  critic  and  to  some  extent  as  composer  he  commanded 
respect,  but  his  peculiarities  prevented  his  moulding  pupils  after 
himself,  and  many  of  his  works  acquired  standing  only  gradually. 
Hence  the  full  impress  of  his  art  was  not  immediate.  In 
bringing  to  light  his  real  significance  no  one  was  more  efficient 
than  Madame  Schumann,  who,  as  one  of  the  foremost  pianists 
of  the  period,  was  able  to  force  public  attention  to  him. 

Clara  (Wieck)  Schumann  (d.  1896)  was  almost  ten  years  her  husband’s 
junior,  being  bom  at  Leipsic  in  1819.  From  her  father  she  received  such 
able  training  that  at  9 she  made  her  debut,  at  1 1 appeared  at  the  Gewand- 
haus,  at  13  began  touring  and  at  17  received  court-honors  at  Vienna,  soon 
^fter  also  winning  great  applause  at  Paris.  At  21  (1840)  she  became  Schu- 
mann’s wife,  and  during  the  following  years  was  his  devoted  companion  and 
inspirer.  After  1856  she  lived  for  a time  at  Berlin  and  from  1863  at  Wies- 
baden, finally,  to  support  herself  and  her  children,  resuming  public  work  and 
in  1878-92  teaching  at  the  Hoch  conservatory  in  Frankfort.  Besides  her 
gifts  as  executant  and  interpreter,  which  were  widely  known  in  Germany  and 
England,  she  was  talented  as  a piano-composer  and  made  a deep  impression 
as  a noble  and  forceful  artist. 

Prominent  names  usually  associated  with  Schumann  are  the  following : — 

Robert  Volkmann  (d.  1893),  born  in  Saxony  in  1815,  came  to  Leipsic  in 
1836  and  learned  much  from  K.  F.  Becker  and  Schumann.  From  1839  he 
taught  at  Prague,  and  from  1842,  except  for  a sojourn  in  1854-8  at  Vienna, 
lived  at  Pesth,  becoming  professor  of  theory  at  the  National  Academy  and 
acquiring  a considerable  Hungarian  flavor  in  his  style.  His  many  works, 
illustrating  a strong  romanticism,  include  2 symphonies,  2 overtures,  3 string- 
serenades,  abundant  chamber  music,  many  piano-pieces  in  various  forms, 
including  transcriptions,  2 masses  for  male  voices,  considerable  other  church 
music,  dramatic  scenas,  songs,  etc. 


5io 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


Theodor  Kirchner  (d.  1903),  also  a Saxon,  bom  in  1824,  was  one  of  the 
young  men  in  whom  Schumann  took  a lively  interest.  From  1838  he  studied 
at  Leipsic,  from  1843  was  organist  at  Winterthur,  from  1862  taught  in  the 
Zurich  conservatory,  in  1873-5  was  head  of  the  Wurzburg  conservatory,  and 
from  1875  lived  successively  at  Leipsic,  Dresden  and  Hamburg.  He  was 
chiefly  a writer  for  the  piano,  excelling  in  brief,  imaginative  works  after 
Schumann’s  best  pattern,  besides  some  chamber-music  and  songs. 

Woldemar  Bargiel  (d.  1897),  born  at  Berlin  in  1828,  had  less  personal 
contact  with  Schumann  than  the  foregoing,  but  belonged  to  his  group. 
From  about  1850  he  taught  at  Berlin,  then  in  the  Cologne  conservatory,  from 
1865  was  director  of  the  Music-School  at  Rotterdam,  and  from  1874  returned 
to  Berlin,  first  in  the  Hochschule  and  from  1882  as  head  of  the  School  for 
Advanced  Composition.  His  powerful  works  include  a symphony,  3 over- 
tures, notable  chamber,  piano  and  vocal  pieces. 

Still  other  names  in  the  Schumann  succession  are  Julius  Otto  Grimm  (d. 
1903),  who,  after  teaching  at  Gottingen,  was  from  i860  head  of  the  Cacilien- 
verein  at  Munster,  writing  a symphony,  2 fine  string-suites  in  canon-form, 
piano-pieces  and  songs ; Albert  Dietrich,  from  1855  conductor  at  Bonn  and 
from  1861  court-choirmaster  at  Oldenburg,  writing  the  opera  Robin  Hood 
(1879),  music  to  Imogeti  (1891),  a striking  symphony,  several  cantatas,  chamber 
and  piano  music,  and  songs;  and  the  younger  Brahms  (d.  1897)  and  Jensen 
(d.  1879),  who  are  elsewhere  discussed  (see  secs.  214,  222). 

192.  His  Work  as  Critic.  — Schumann’s  mental  power  was 
nowhere  better  shown  than  in  his  estimates  of  music  and  musi- 
cians. His  spirit  was  genial  and  kind,  eager  to  acknowledge 
merit  and  to  bestow  praise.  His  knowledge  and  taste  had  been 
assiduously  developed  by  study  and  reflection,  so  that  he  was 
broadly  responsive.  He  made  it  his  business  to  know  the  works 
of  many  periods  and  schools.  Severe  habits  of  self-discipline 
gave  him  fine  powers  of  analysis  and  a keen  sense  of  perspec- 
tive. He  was  ready  to  weigh  the  opinions  of  other  critics,  if 
intelligent,  but  his  conclusions  were  absolutely  his  own,  and, 
once  made,  were  tenaciously  held.  As  we  now  look  back  to 
them,  we  marvel  that  as  a rule  they  were  so  just  and  right. 
He  was,  of  course,  eager  to  welcome  every  touch  of  romantic 
fervor,  but  was  catholic  enough  to  recognize  worthy  effort  in 
any  style.  His  chief  limitation  lay  in  a certain  aversion  to  the 
operatic  styles  of  his  day,  which  led  him  not  only  to  condemn 
the  meretricious  and  vulgar,  but  to  regard  with  doubt  much 
that  might  well  have  roused  his  interest. 

Fully  as  remarkable  as  his  wisdom  in  framing  critical  judg- 
ments was  his  felicity  in  putting  them  into  words.  He  knew 


SCHUMANN 


511 

how  to  speak  his  thought  clearly,  forcibly,  with  elegance,  often 
with  brilliant  wit,  but  also  with  unfailing  graciousness,  even 
when  finding  fault.  His  literary  impulse  led  him  to  an  easy 
amplitude  of  style,  often  full  of  apt  discussion  or  illustration, 
yet  nothing  is  said  that  is  not  worth  saying.  Though  he 
abounds  in  quotable  apothegms,  there  is  none  of  the  journalist’s 
eagerness  to  seem  clever.  The  thrill  of  imaginative  ideality  is 
seldom  absent,  and  many  pages  are  made  charming  by  the 
play  of  quiet  humor. 

In  his  earlier  works  the  extravagant  dialect  of  Jean  Paul  and  his 
school  is  much  in  evidence,  but  this  gradually  disappears.  For  several 
years  (from  about  1833)  he  often  used  the  device  of  introducing  imagi- 
nary personages,  giving  voice  to  varying  views.  Some  of  these,  like 
‘ Florestan,’  ‘ Eusebius  1 and  1 Meister  Raro,’  refer  to  aspects  of  himself  — 
the  first  standing  for  his  impulsive  and  fanciful  eagerness,  the  second  for 
his  quieter  and  more  contemplative  thoughtfulness,  and  the  third  for  his 
cool  judgment  as  between  opposing  impulses.  A variety  of  other  names 
refer  to  various  friends,  especially  to  his  colleagues  in  the  Zeitschrift 
enterprise  and  to  Clara  Wieck.  Many  of  these  fictitious  names  were 
freely  used  with  his  shorter  piano-works  as  well  as  in  his  literary  writings. 

Prominent  among  the  composers  to  whom  he  gives  careful  attention 
were  the  following : — Bach,  Beethoven,  Schubert,  Weber,  Field,  Berlioz, 
Mendelssohn,  Chopin,  Liszt,  Wagner,  Henselt,  Heller,  Franz,  Bennett, 
Gade,  Clara  Wieck,  and  (in  1853)  Brahms.  When  one  considers  how 
rich  the  period  was  in  the  outpouring  of  musical  inspiration,  it  is  easy  to 
see  what  a magnificent  field  it  offered  for  a truly  great  critic. 

But  Schumann’s  influence  extended  beyond  what  is  often  con- 
sidered to  be  the  domain  of  criticism.  He  recognized  the  value 
of  genuine  music-history  and  perceived  its  large  structural  out- 
lines. Although  not  himself  a historian  by  formal  publication, 
he  was  thoroughly  historical  in  habit  of  thought.  He  had  a 
fine  sense  of  the  large  movements  of  musical  art,  and  of  the 
relation  of  composers  and  styles  to  them.  He  had  the  scholar’s 
desire  for  accuracy  and  willingness  to  spend  time  in  research. 
He  did  valuable  service  in  bringing  to  light  forgotten  works  of 
Schubert,  and  he  set  a pattern  in  the  important  task  of  puri- 
fying scores  from  errors  and  glosses.  He  was  also  pedagogi- 
cally  wise,  and  his  many  aphorisms  about  the  spirit,  methods 
and  objects  of  music-study  have  permanent  validity  and  co- 
gency. Hence  it  is  safe  to  call  him  the  first  shining  example 
of  truly  modern  musical  scholarship,  one  whose  influence  has 
been  enduring  and  altogether  beneficial. 


512 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


In  founding  the  Neue  Zeitschrift  in  1834  Schumann’s  special  coad- 
jutors were  his  teacher  Friedrich  Wieck  (d.  1873)  ; Julius  Knorr  (d. 
1861),  a Leipsic  piano-virtuoso  and  a teacher  of  renown;  and  Karl 
Banck  (d.  1889),  who  from  1840  was  a singing-teacher  at  Dresden  and  a 
well-known  critic.  During  the  first  year  Knorr  was  nominally  editor. 
In  1835-44,  when  Schumann  was  in  charge,  he  was  specially  assisted  by 
Konstantin  Julius  Becker  (d.  1859),  who  from  1843  also  taught  in 
Dresden;  Ferdinand  Prdger  (d.  1891),  a leading  piano-teacher  in 
London;  Friedrich  Hieronymus  Truhn  (d.  1886),  then  theatre-direc- 
tor at  Danzig;  and  Ernst  Wenzel  (d.  1880),  one  of  the  early  staff  at 
the  Leipsic  conservatory. 

In  1844  the  editorship  passed  to  Franz  Brendel  (d.  1868),  another  of 
Wieck’s  pupils,  who  carried  it  on  for  over  20  years  in  conjunction  with 
his  historical  writing.  In  1856-60  he  was  assisted  by  Richard  Pohl  (d. 
1896),  then  at  Weimar,  later  a powerful  writer  on  behalf  of  Wagner  and 
Berlioz;  in  1863-7  by  Heinrich  Porges  (d.  1900),  later  of  Munich; 
and  from  about  1865  by  Her?nann  Zopff  (d.  1883).  Among  the  con- 
tributors during  this  period,  when  the  Wagner  question  had  become 
acute,  were  the  Lutheran  pastor  Karl  Adolf  Tschirch  (d.  1875)  ; A.  J. 
Riihlmann  (d.  1877),  professor  in  the  Dresden  conservatory;  the 
young  opera-writer  Cornelius  (d.  1874),  then  at  Weimar;  Karl 
Emanuel  Klitzsch  (d.  1889),  cantor  at  Zwickau;  Karl  Koss?naly  of 
Stettin  (d.  1893);  the  poet  Peter  Lohmann  of  Leipsic;  and  Paul 
Fischer  (d.  1894),  cantor  at  Zittau.  All  these,  except  Kossmaly,  were 
strong  advocates  of  Wagner  and  the  new  school  generally. 

After  1868,  under  the  regime  of  Christian  Friedrich  Kahnt  (d.  1897), 
who  had  been  publisher  since  1857,  Zopff  was  promoted  to  be  editor, 
continuing  till  his  death  (1883),  assisted  for  a time  by  the  impulsive  Otto 
Remsdorf  (d.  1890),  later  of  Vienna  and  Berlin,  with  contributors  like 
Jean  Schucht  (d.  1894),  Friedrich  Stade  and  Bernhard  Vogel  (d.  1898). 

The  Zeitschrift  is  the  organ  of  the  Allgemeiner  deutscher  Musikverein , 
founded  in  1859  to  promote  the  newer  tendencies  in  composition. 

193.  Leipsic  as  a Literary  Centre.  — There  was  good  reason 
why  an  intellectual  leader  like  Schumann  should  have  chosen 
Leipsic  as  his  fulcrum  of  influence,  for  Leipsic  throughout  the 
early  and  middle  19th  century  was  the  chief  headquarters  both 
for  the  publication  of  music  itself  and  for  the  prosecution  of 
scholarly  work  about  music.  Doubtless  this  musical  eminence 
arose  from  the  leadership  which  it  had  long  before  secured  in 
all  kinds  of  literary  activity,  but  it  was  now  accentuated  by 
several  circumstances.  Among  these  may  be  named  the  broad 
and  enterprising  policy  of  the  publishers  Breitkopf  & Hartel, 
the  location  here  of  the  Allgemeine  musikalische  Zeitung , and 
the  striking  conjunction  of  artistic  efforts  in  the  Thomasschule 
(with  its  intimate  relation  to  the  city  churches),  the  University, 


LEIPSIC  AS  A LITERARY  CENTRE 


513 


the  Gewandhaus  orchestra  and  finally  the  brilliant  Conservatory 
— these  together  making  the  city  a Mecca  for  musicians  for 
many  decades.  That  Schumann  should  settle  here  and  found 
his  new  magazine  was  almost  inevitable.  After  the  mid-point 
of  the  century  other  cities  in  Germany  became  rivals  of  Leipsic 
in  influence,  but  before  that  time  it  was  plainly  the  musical 
centre  for  the  whole  of  northern  Europe. 

The  constructive  work  of  Breitkopf  <Sr»  Hartel  in  publishing,  often  on 
an  extremely  liberal  scale,  complete,  critical  editions  of  the  works  of  great 
composers  became  most  striking  during  the  later  decades  of  the  century 
(not  here  under  review),  but  the  same  spirit  has  always  marked  their 
policy.  The  19th-century  development  of  the  firm  was  due  to  the  energy 
of  Gottfried  Christoph  Hartel  (d.  1827)  and  his  sons  and  grandsons. 
About  1800  the  process  of  printing  from  soft-metal  plates  was  introduced, 
and  in  1805  the  new  process  of  lithography.  Early  examples  of  extensive 
editions  issued  were  the  works  of  Mozart  (1798-1816),  Haydn  (1800-6), 
Clementi  (1800-18)  and  Dussek  (1814-8).  Foremost  among  the  monu- 
mental publications  of  later  years  were  the  works  of  Bach  (1851-96), 
followed  by  those  of  Handel  (vols.  1-18, 1859-64),  Mendelssohn,  Chopin, 
Schumann,  Schubert,  Palestrina,  Schiitz,  Gretry,  Lassus,  Sweelinck,  Vic- 
toria, Gluck,  Berlioz,  etc.  Besides  these,  from  about  1850  the  firm  has 
been  active,  with  others,  in  issuing  cheap  editions  of  classical  works. 

As  illustrating  the  importance  of  Leipsic  as  a publishing  centre,  the 
following  list  may  be  given  of  the  leading  houses  established  there  during 
the  century  : — in  1800  the  Bureau  de  Musique  of  Hofmeister , from  which 
in  1814  branched  off  the  extensive  business  of  C.  F.  Peters ; in  1831  the 
house  of  Kistner  (succeeding  to  that  of  Probst ) ; in  1832  the  branch  of 
Schuberth's  Hamburg  house;  in  1846  those  of  Siegel  and  Roder ; in 
1850  that  of  Senff;  in  185 1 that  of  Kahnt ; in  1862  those  of  For  berg  and 
Garbrecht ; and  in  1866  those  of  Fritzsch  and  Seitz. 

The  Allgemeine  musikalische  Zeitung  (quarterly  since  1 81 1 ) was  founded 
in  1798  by  Breitkopf  Hartel  and  Johann  Friedrich  Rochlitz  (d.  1842), 
who  was  editor  till  1818  and  contributor  till  1835.  In  1826-42  the  editor 
was  Gottfried  Wilhelm  Fink  (d.  1846)  ; in  1843-4  Hauptmann  (d. 
1868),  the  cantor  at  the  Thomasschule  and  professor  in  the  new  con- 
servatory; in  1846-8  Johann  Christian  Lobe  (d.  1881),  a diligent 
teacher  and  composer;  in  1868-71  and  1875-82  the  indefatigable 
Friedrich  Chrysander  (d.  1901).  Though  always  more  conservative 
than  the  Neue  Zeitschrift , the  Zeitung  has  been  a power  in  musical 
scholarship  and  criticism. 

Among  many  other  periodicals,  mention  may  be  made  of  the  Signale 
fur  die  musikalische  Welt  (weekly),  founded  in  1843  by  Bartholf  Senjf 
(d.  1900)  and  edited  by  him  till  his  death ; the  two  weeklies,  Die 
Sangerhalle  and  Die  7ieue  Sdngerhalle , founded  in  1861  and  1862  in 
connection  with  the  fresh  interest  in  male  choruses  that  led  in  1862  to 
the  organization  of  the  Deutsche  Sangerbund  out  of  the  previously  dis- 


514 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


connected  Liedertafeln  — the  editor  of  the  former  being  Heinrich  Pfeil 
(d.  1899),  and  of  the  latter  for  about  10  years  the  poet  Konrad  Muller 
[ von  der  Werra\  (d.  1881),  who  was  the  projector  of  the  Sangerbund ; 
and  the  Musikalisches  IVochenblatt . founded  in  1870  by  Oscar  Paul  and 
Ernst  Wilhelm  Fritzsch , and  conducted  by  the  latter  in  the  interest  of 
the  newest  ideas  and  workers. 

The  cantorate  of  the  Thomasschule,  involving  the  control  of  the  music 
in  the  four  city-churches,  was  filled  by  a dignified  series  of  scholars : — 
from  1800  by  the  organist  and  composer  A.  E.  Muller  (d.  1817)  ; from 
1810  by  the  composer  J.  G.  Schicht  (d.  1823);  from  1823  by  the  ex- 
cellent theorist  Theodor  Weinlig  (d.  1842);  from  1842  by  the  greater 
theorist  Hauptmann  (d.  1868)  ; from  1868  by  Hauptmann’s  colleague 
at  the  conservatory,  E.  F.  Richter  (d.  1879)  ? from  1879  by  the  con- 
ductor, composer  and  scholar  Wilhelm  Rust  (d.  1892)  ; and  from  1892 
by  the  composer  Gustav  Schreck. 

At  the  University  prominent  musical  directors  were  from  1842  Gottfried 
Wilhelm  Fink  (d.  1846);  from  1843  (at  first  as  organist)  Hermann 
Langer  (d.  1889)  ; from  1887  the  noted  organist,  composer  and  critic 
Hermann  Kretzschmar ; from  1898  the  eminent  conductor  and  composer 
Hemrich  Zollner ; and  from  1907  Max  Reger.  Among  the  university 
professors  who  have  investigated  and  published  in  musical  fields 
are  C.  F.  Michaelis  (d.  1834),  who  wrote  on  aesthetics  and  peda- 
gogy from  1795;  Johann  Gottfried  Jakob  Hermann  (d.  1848),  the 
author  of  important  works  on  metrics  from  1796;  the  physiologist 
Ernst  Heinrich  Weber  (d.  1878),  with  works  on  acoustics  from  1820; 
the  medical  professor  Karl  Ludwig  Merkel,  who  discussed  the  appa- 
ratus of  the  voice  from  1856;  the  physicist  Gustav  Theodor  Fech?ier 
(d.  1887),  with  works  on  psycho-physics  and  aesthetics  from  i860; 
and  the  prolific  and  learned  Hugo  Rietnann , with  discussions  of  history 
and  theory  from  1878. 

In  addition,  may  be  mentioned  several  literary  workers  not  holding 
institutional  positions,  such  as  from  1825  the  organist,  historian  and 
book-collector  Karl  Ferdinand  Becker  (d.  18 77),  who  left  his  library  to 
the  city,  with  his  successor  in  the  care  of  the  music  section  of  the  City 
Library,  the  critic  and  editor  Alfred  Dorjfel ; for  a few  years  (1847-51) 
the  great  archaeologist  and  biographer  Otto  Jahn  (d.  1869),  later  of 
Bonn;  the  critic  and  lexicographer  Eduard  Bernsdorf  (d.  1901); 
from  1866  the  historian,  theorist  and  piano-expert  Oscar  Paul  (d.  1898) ; 
the  teacher,  lecturer  and  essayist  Albert  Karl  Tottmann,  author  of  a fine 
summary  of  violin  and  viola  music  (1873);  the  intelligent  editor  of 
essays  Paul  von  Waldersee  (d.  1906);  and  from  1880  for  some  years 
the  industrious  historian,  lexicographer  and  composer  August  Reissmann 
(d.  1903),  who  here  completed  his  lives  of  Bach,  Handel,  Gluck  and 
Weber,  and  his  account  of  the  Opera. 

In  estimating  the  importance  of  Leipsic  as  a centre,  the  activity  of 
the  purely  artistic  workers  mentioned  later  (secs.  195-7)  must  also  be 
considered. 


CHAPTER  XXXI 


MENDELSSOHN  AND  THE  LEIPSIC  CIRCLE 

194.  Mendelssohn’s  Usefulness.  — Beginning  some  years 
earlier  than  Schumann,  and  then  continuing  side  by  side  with 
him,  ran  the  picturesque  and  influential  career  of  Mendelssohn. 
The  vivacity  of  his  genius,  his  eminent  intellectual  equipment, 
and  his  gifts  for  social  leadership  and  organization  early  gave 
him  a commanding  position,  which  he  used  with  zestful  earnest- 
ness for  the  advance  of  artistic  culture  until  cut  off  in  the  midst 
of  his  years.  Like  Schumann,  he  was  drawn  to  Leipsic,  and 
there,  as  a conductor  and  teacher,  he  found  ample  scope  for 
his  irrepressible  vitality.  His  extensive  travels  had  given  him 
a wide  reputation.  The  stream  of  compositions  from  his  pen 
was  constant  and  full  of  charm.  Pupils  and  inquirers  came 
to  him  from  far  and  wide.  His  style  and  his  ideas  were  for  a 
time  standard  in  many  circles.  Thus  he  had  an  opportunity  in 
many  respects  unique,  and  he  met  it  with  superb  61an. 

But  the  quality  of  his  musical  impulse  was  distinctly  different 
from  Schumann’s.  He  was  poetic  and  romantic  without  doubt, 
but  with  no  such  depth  of  conviction.  He  was  too  well  poised 
for  strange  intensities  or  daring  flights.  He  had  an  exquisite 
sense  of  form  and  balance,  analogous  to  Mozart’s,  and  a stronger 
craving  for  objective  beauty  than  for  subjective  expression. 
Hence  he  was  more  inclined  than  Schumann  to  cling  to  the 
classical  patterns  of  style  and  to  the  unpassionate  classical 
spirit.  With  him  commenced  a new  stage  in  the  classical  develop- 
ment, one  that  was  warmed  and  enriched  by  a new  fullness  of 
feeling,  and  that  sometimes  pushed  out  toward  new  paths,  but 
which,  after  all,  was  more  the  natural  sequel  of  the  past  than  a 
starting-point  for  the  future. 

For  this  very  reason  he  performed  a real  service  in  his  day. 
Without  seeming  to  oppose  the  ultra-romantic  outreaching  after 
self-declaration  and  unfettered  imagination,  he  yet  compelled 
attention  to  the  just  claims  of  symmetry,  technical  finish  and 

5i5 


516 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


outward  grace,  and  of  a style  that  is  true  to  general  or  ideal 
humanity  as  well  as  to  the  individual.  He  unconsciously 
avoided  in  his  own  practice  the  expression  of  abnormal  and  mor- 
bid moods,  and  even  drew  back  from  the  embodiment  of  poignant 
pathos.  In  his  own  nature  there  was  a marvelous  buoyancy 
united  with  hearty  religious  earnestness,  and  the  fields  of 
composition  in  which  he  succeeded  best  were  those  in  which 
these  were  reflected.  His  technical  expertness  and  flow  of 
creative  inspiration  were  happily  adequate  to  make  the  expres- 
sion of  these  qualities  efficient  in  offsetting  tendencies  in  which 
they  were  lacking.  And  to  his  personal  influence  Mendelssohn 
added  the  massive  and  continued  power  of  the  several  organiza- 
tions and  institutions  with  which  he  was  identified,  so  that  the 
effectiveness  of  his  ideas  was  larger  and  more  lasting  than 
through  his  work  as  an  individual. 

Mendelssohn  is  also  to  be  remembered,  like  Handel,  for  his 
strong  impress  upon  the  progress  of  music  in  England.  From 
the  first  of  his  eleven  trips  thither  (1829)  he  was  idolized  by 
musicians  and  public,  and  became  the  model  upon  which  for 
half  a century  almost  all  English  musicians  sought  to  shape 
themselves.  Although  perhaps  this  fact  resulted  in  a one- 
sidedness of  English  style  and  taste  during  this  period,  the 
sterling  value  of  the  influence  thus  exerted  cannot  be  gainsaid. 

Felix  Mendelssohn-Bartholdy  (d.  1847)  came  of  a wealthy  and  intellectual 
Jewish  family,  which  finally  adopted  Christianity.  His  grandfather  was  the 
famous  Moses  Mendelssohn  (d.  1786),  the  philosopher,  Jewish  historian  and 
Biblical  student.  Both  his  father  and  his  cultivated  mother  were  identified 
with  Berlin,  though  at  his  birth  in  1809,  the  father  was  a banker  at  Hamburg. 
All  the  circumstances  of  his  youth  were  extremely  stimulating.  The  parents 
were  deeply  interested  in  training  their  four  children,  gave  them  fine  tutors  in 
varied  subjects,  surrounded  them  with  choice  social,  literary  and  artistic  in- 
fluences, and  led  them  early  into  a symmetrical  and  ample  culture.  The 
eldest  child  was  Fanny  (d.  1847),  and  between  her  and  Felix  there  was 
always  a peculiar  comradeship.  They  were  both  precocious  musicians,  ex- 
celling as  pianists  and  composers,  besides  becoming  accomplished  in  other 
ways.  Felix  studied  at  Berlin  under  Berger,  Zelter  and  Henning,  and  was 
twice  taken  to  Paris  for  lessons  (under  M me.  Bigot)  or  advice  (from  Cherubini). 
Before  he  was  10  he  had  played  in  public  in  a trio,  and  at  12  was  already  a me- 
thodical and  fertile  composer  for  the  voice,  the  piano  and  other  instruments. 
His  father  provided  expert  performers  to  interpret  his  larger  pieces,  but  not 
till  he  was  16  consented  to  his  taking  music  as  a career.  By  this  time  he 
was  already  acquainted  with  many  of  the  ablest  musicians  of  his  time.  He 


MENDELSSOHN 


517 


was  a diligent,  accurate  and  versatile  student,  a finished  master  of  the 
technique  of  composition  and  performance  while  yet  but  a boy,  and  on  fire 
with  ambition  and  inspiration.  The  analogy  often  drawn  between  him  and 
Mozart  is  close  and  just,  for  they  both 
developed  with  phenomenal  rapidity 
and  were  strongly  akin  in  stylistic  gifts. 

His  training  gave  him  command  of  a 
wide  range  of  musical  literature,  and 
his  prompt  enthusiasm  for  Bach  and 
Beethoven  indicated  the  vigor  of  his 
tastes.  At  12  he  fell  under  the  fascina- 
tion of  Weber,  and  at  15  received 
lasting  benefit  from  lessons  from  Mo- 
scheles.  The  variety  of  influences  that 
touched  him  was  indescribable,  yet 
without  affecting  his  spontaneity.  In 
1825  the  Mendelssohn  family  first  oc- 
cupied the  extensive  mansion  and  park 
which  became  the  rendezvous  of  musi- 
cal and  literary  people  for  many  years. 

In  1825,  when  17,  Mendelssohn  re- 
vealed the  charm  and  strength  of  his 
style  by  the  quartet  in  B minor,  the  short  opera  Die  Hochzeit  des  Camacho 
(performed  in  1827  under  Spontini),  and  the  octet  for  strings,  followed  (1826) 
by  the  extraordinary  Midsummer  Night's  Dream  overture  — these  and  many 
other  works  of  this  first  period  being  exquisitely  romantic.  Though  the 
opera  was  greeted  with  applause,  it  was  immediately  withdrawn  by  Spontini, 
his  jealous  opposition  being  the  first  of  many  checks  to  Mendelssohn’s 
ambition  that  made  him  strongly  dislike  Berlin.  In  1828,  with  a few  select 
singers,  he  began  the  study  of  Bach’s  St.  Matthew  Passion  which  led  to  its 
triumphant  revival  by  the  Singakademie  under  his  leadership  exactly  a century 
after  its  first  performance  at  Leipsic.  This  achievement,  notable  as  a factor 
in  the  general  Bach  revival,  increased  the  jealousy  of  many  Berlin  musicians. 
Partly  because  of  this,  Mendelssohn  gave  up  study  at  the  university  and  set 
out  upon  a long  tour,  visiting  in  1829  London  and  Scotland,  in  1830  Munich, 
Vienna  and  all  the  chief  Italian  cities,  especially  Rome,  and  in  1831  Switz- 
erland, Paris  and  London  again.  His  activity  was  incessant  and  varied, 
including  brilliant  appearances  as  pianist  or  conductor,  constant  composition 
in  many  forms,  from  songs  to  symphonies,  much  serious  study  and  thought- 
ful sight-seeing,  and  abundant  social  gayety.  He  thus  widened  his  circle  of 
friends,  and  enriched  his  imagination  and  spirit.  As  he  was  returning  in  1832, 
Zelter  died  and  he  was  pushed  forward  as  a candidate  for  the  leadership  of 
the  Singakademie,  but  was  not  elected  — another  source  of  bitterness  toward 
Berlin.  In  1833,  however,  he  conducted  the  Lower  Rhine  Festival  at 
Diisseldorf  with  such  eclat  that  he  was  forthwith  appointed  town-musician 
there.  After  another  trip  to  England  he  took  up  his  varied  duties  with  eager- 
ness, though  he  soon  withdrew  from  the  opera-direction.  In  1835  he 
conducted  the  Lower  Rhine  Festival  at  Cologne.  Just  before  this  he 


5i8 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


accepted  an  invitation  to  become  conductor  of  the  Gewandhaus  orchestra  at 
Leipsic. 

At  Leipsic  he  found  conditions  most  congenial.  The  orchestra  was 
already  famous,  and  was  now  strengthened  by  the  addition  of  David  as  con- 
certmaster.  There  was  no  professional  friction,  and  the  public  was  enthusiastic. 
The  relief  from  the  coolness  of  Berlin  and  the  complications  at  DUsseldorf 
was  most  welcome.  He  plunged  ardently  into  rehearsals  and  concerts,  besides 
pushing  on  always  with  composition.  His  versatility  and  endurance  were 
constantly  taxed,  but  his  fidelity  and  zest  responded  to  every  call.  In 
1836,  after  memorable  concerts  at  Leipsic,  he  conducted  the  festival  at 
Dusseldorf,  producing  the  oratorio  St.  Paul  (begun  in  1832).  He  also  led  the 
Cacilienverein  at  Frankfort,  where  he  met  Cdcile  Jeanrenaud,  daughter  of  a 
Swiss  clergyman,  to  whom  in  1837  he  was  happily  married.  In  1837  he 
visited  England,  conducting  St.  Paul  at  Birmingham  and  repeatedly  display- 
ing his  mastery  as  an  organist,  particularly  in  Bach's  works.  In  spite  of  labors 
as  organizer  and  leader,  he  was  constantly  adding  to  his  list  of  great  works  — 
the  42d  Psalm  (1837)  and  the  violin-concerto  (1838),  for  example.  In  1839 
he  gave  Schubert’s  Symphony  in  C,  which  Schumann  had  recovered  at  Vienna. 
In  1838  and  1839  conducted  festivals  at  Cologne  and  Dusseldorf.  In 
1840  came  the  unique  Lobgesang  (‘  Symphonie-Cantata’ ) and  other  music  at 
the  400th  anniversary  of  the  invention  of  printing.  This  he  repeated  at 
Birmingham. 

In  1829  the  University  of  Berlin  had  tried  in  vain  to  induce  him  to  become 
professor.  In  1840  came  an  offer  from  the  new  king  Friedrich  Wilhelm  IV. 
to  take  charge  of  the  music  section  in  a projected  Academy  of  Arts.  This  he 
accepted,  though  with  misgiving,  and  removed  to  Berlin  in  1841.  He  now 
received  the  title  of  Kapellmeister  from  both  Saxony  and  Prussia.  The 
resumption  of  life  at  Berlin  was  disagreeable,  and  the  new  enterprise  vague 
and  beset  by  difficulty,  so  that  he  often  visited  Leipsic  for  relief.  In  1842  he 
conducted  the  Dusseldorf  festival  once  more,  again  went  to  England,  and 
made  a trip  to  Switzerland.  Before  that  year  was  over  it  was  clear  that  the 
proposed  music-school  was  infeasible,  and  he  was  eager  to  leave.  But  the 
king  ordered  the  formation  of  the  since  famous  Domchor  and  named  Mendels- 
sohn as  director,  an  appointment  that  he  could  hold  without  being  in  con- 
stant residence. 

Returning  to  Leipsic,  he  secured  a grant  from  the  king  of  Saxony  for  the 
foundation  of  a conservatory,  opened  early  in  1843.  The  success  of 
this  long-cherished  scheme,  though  full  of  satisfaction,  brought  infinite  labor 
and  care.  From  now  till  the  end  his  life  was  desperately  crowded.  The 
king  of  Prussia  had  imposed  large  tasks  upon  him  in  composition.  He  was 
often  in  request  for  special  duties  here  and  there.  His  friends  and  corre- 
spondents multiplied  steadily,  and  his  advice  and  assistance  were  lavishly 
given.  As  his  mother  had  recently  died  (and  his  father  some  years  before), 
in  1843  he  moved  once  more  to  Berlin,  becoming  master  of  the  Mendelssohn 
mansion.  In  1844  he  made  a long  and  strenuous  English  trip.  Duties  at 
Berlin  were  pressed  upon  him,  but  fulfilling  them  was  made  exasperating  by 
stupid  officials,  selfish  musicians  and  an  apathetic  public.  At  the  end  of 
1844  he  withdrew  to  Frankfort,  chiefly  to  secure  rest  from  excessive  strain. 


MENDELSSOHN 


519 


In  the  fall  of  1845  he  took  up  work  again  at  Leipsic,  teaching,  conducting  and 
composing.  In  1846  he  led  a chain  of  festivals  at  Aix-la-Chapelle,  Dusseldorf, 
Li&ge  and  Cologne,  and  in  August  conducted  at  Birmingham  the  first  per- 
formance of  Elijah  (first  planned  in  1837).  This  was  his  greatest  triumph 
and  one  of  the  most  thrilling  of  historic  musical  occasions.  At  once  he  set  about 
an  elaborate  rewriting  of  the  work,  not  completed  for  some  months.  Though 
Gade  had  been  from  1843  conductor  at  the  Gewandhaus,  Mendelssohn  often 
took  his  place.  Commissions  from  Berlin  continued  to  arrive.  He  was  at 
work  on  a third  oratorio,  Christus , was  always  seeking  a suitable  opera-libretto, 
was  occasionally  on  duty  at  Dresden,  kept  up  teaching  and  correspondence, 
and  was  ceaselessly  active  otherwise.  In  the  spring  of  1847  he  went  once  more 
to  England,  acting  repeatedly  as  conductor  and  as  soloist.  Hardly  had  he 
returned  when  he  heard  of  the  sudden  death  of  his  sister.  The  shock  broke 
him  down.  Periods  of  depression  and  suffering  became  frequent,  and  after  a 
few  months  he  died.  The  funeral  at  Leipsic  was  an  extraordinary  tribute  of 
respect  and  affection,  and  the  burial  was  at  Berlin.  Commemorative  concerts 
were  given  throughout  Europe,  with  notable  tokens  of  sorrow. 

Mendelssohn  was  full  of  charm  and  magnetism.  He  was  vivacious  and 
social,  fond  of  gayety  and  fun,  kind  and  tactful,  many-sided  in  his  interests, 
eager  to  spend  himself  for  friends  or  any  good  cause,  punctilious  in  performing 
duties,  high-minded  in  every  instinct  and  impulse.  He  was  so  approachable 
that  he  was  overwhelmed  with  drafts  upon  thought  and  energy.  He  doubtless 
was  too  prodigal  of  his  powers,  but  the  breadth  and  intensity  of  his  personal 
influence  were  momentous  for  musical  progress.  His  every  effort  went  toward 
elevating  the  standard  of  musical  art,  and  his  example  helped  musicianship  to 
its  rightful  place  in  the  world’s  thought.  The  reality  of  his  religious  convic- 
tions gave  his  character  and  work  a fervor  of  high  quality. 

The  Mendelssohns  had  five  children.  The  widow  died  in  1853  at 
Frankfort. 


195.  His  Works  and  Style.  — In  spite  of  the  distractions  of 
his  career,  Mendelssohn  produced  an  extraordinary  body  of 
compositions,  ranging  over  almost  the  entire  circle  of  large 
forms.  His  technique  as  composer  was  masterly,  sure  and  solid 
in  its  learning,  and  often  finely  original  in  invention.  As  has 
been  suggested,  his  style  shows  an  intimate  blending  of  classical 
and  romantic  features.  This  mixture  was  historically  useful, 
though  it  has  stood  in  the  way  of  his  just  appraisement  by  some 
critics.  Probably  his  power  is  best  shown  in  certain  of  his 
chamber  works,  in  his  orchestral  overtures,  and  in  his  oratorios. 
These  are  rich  in  idea,  finished  in  execution  and  eloquent  in 
spirit.  Yet  it  is  true  that  he  had  his  mannerisms,  that  his 
studies  and  tastes  led  him  often  to  follow  models  from  the  past, 
and  that  his  freshness  of  inspiration  was  not  so  constant  in  his 


520 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


later  years  as  in  the  earlier.  It  is  a question  whether  his  per- 
sistent joyousness  of  sentiment  militates  against  his  artistic 
greatness.  Here  he  presents  a striking  contrast  to  many  com- 
posers who  are  thought  to  embody  the  spirit  of  modern  life. 
The  absence  of  morbidness  need  not  be  regretted,  but,  since 
his  art  is  seldom  or  never  the  voice  of  sorrow,  darkness  or  strug- 
gle, it  is  in  so  far  not  a full  rescript  of  life.  But  he  should  not 
be  compared  with  others  without  remembering  that  the  converse 
of  this  is  also  true. 

A fairly  complete  summary  of  Mendelssohn’s  works  is  as  follows : — 
(a)  4 symphonies,  including  the  ‘Reformation’  (1830),  the  ‘Italian’ 
(1833),  the  ‘Scotch’  (1842),  7 concert-overtures,  including  the  Mid- 
summer Night"1  s Dream  (1826),  the  ‘Hebrides’  (1830-2),  the  Meeres- 
stille  und  gluckliche  Fahrt  (1832),  a famous  violin-concerto  (1844)  and 
2 piano-concertos,  besides  some  other  ensemble  pieces ; ( b ) 7 quartets, 
2 quintets  and  an  octet  for  strings,  2 trios,  3 quartets  and  a sextet  for 
piano  and  strings,  and  a few  violin-  and  ’cello-sonatas ; ( c ) 3 piano- 

sonatas,  a capri ccio,  rondo  capriccioso,  several  fantasias,  caprices,  varia- 
tions, fugues,  8 books  of  Lieder  ohne  Worte  (1830-45),  characteristic 
pieces,  etc.,  and  several  pieces  for  four  hands ; (d)  6 organ-sonatas 

(1844-5),  and  several  preludes  and  fugues;  (e)  the  comic  opera  Die 
Hochzeit  des  Cajnacho  (1825),  fragments  of  Lorelei , the  singspiel  Die 
Heimkehr  aus  der  Fremde , 2 Festgesdnge , music  for  Goethe’s  Die  erste 
Waipurgisnacht  (1831-2),  Sophokles’  Antigone  (1841),  Shakespeare’s 
Midsummer  Night's  Dream  (1842),  Racine’s  Athalie  (1843-4),  So- 
phokles’ CEdipus  at  Colonus  (1845),  with  a great  number  of  quartets 
for  male  or  mixed  voices,  over  80  songs  and  some  duets ; (f)  the  ora- 
torios St.  Paul  (1836)  and  Elijah  (1846),  portions  of  Christus,  the 
Lobgesang  (1840),  8 Psalms,  including  the  42d  (1837),  the  95th  (1838), 
and  the  114th  (1840),  the  cantata  Lauda  Sion  (1846),  and  many  motets 
and  anthems,  some  a cappella.  In  addition,  there  are  many  early  works 
not  published  in  popular  form.  A standard  edition  of  his  works  is  issued 
by  Breitkopf  & Hartel  (1874-7). 

Of  his  innumerable  letters  a large  number  have  been  published  (from 
1861). 

Mendelssohn  differed  widely  from  Schumann  in  that  he  added 
little  to  the  formal  resources  of  music.  For  the  most  part  he 
used  patterns  and  methods  already  known.  The  same  is  true 
of  technique  and  orchestration.  Yet  certain  styles  he  handled 
with  such  special  grace  that  they  became  fresh  under  his  hand. 
Familiar  instances  are  his  nimble  scherzos,  his  gay  caprices,  his 
elegant  piano-songs,  some  of  his  oratorio  arias  and  choruses,  and 
the  development-sections  of  his  ensemble  works.  His  instinct 


MENDELSSOHN 


521 


for  instrumentation  was  sound  and  vivid,  and  his  mastery  of 
vocal  effect  unquestioned. 

He  was  a pianist  and  organist  of  the  first  order,  and  a good 
viola-player.  Although  his  keyboard  technique  was  ample,  with 
some  peculiar  excellencies  in  crispness  and  clarity,  he  disdained 
the  use  of  it  for  its  own  sake.  His  strength  lay  in  the  absolute 
rendering  of  the  musical  idea  as  he  conceived  it.  As  an  inter- 
preter he  was  therefore  exceptionally  able,  especially  as  regards 
the  works  of  Bach,  Mozart  and  Beethoven.  His  powers  of 
improvisation  were  superb,  and  he  had  an  extraordinary  musical 
memory.  As  a conductor  he  was  strict  and  conservative,  but  so 
tactful  and  full  of  enthusiasm  as  to  command  unbounded  devo- 
tion from  players  and  singers. 

He  had  the  gift  of  free  self-expression  in  speech  and  deed, 
and  the  desire  to  impress  himself  upon  others.  His  mind  was 
clear  and  orderly,  his  sympathies  warm,  and  his  spirit  contagious. 
Hence  he  was  a brilliant  and  powerful  teacher,  especially  with 
advanced  students.  Here  he  was  the  opposite  of  Schumann. 
Hence,  while  the  latter  left  almost  no  disciples  and  was  not 
generally  understood  till  long  after  1850,  Mendelssohn  inspired 
a host  of  pupils  and  admirers  in  many  lands,  so  that  his  im- 
mediate influence  for  a generation  was  immense.  These  fol- 
lowers, some  of  them  close  imitators,  are  sometimes  called 
‘ the  Mendelssohnian  school,  ’ though  they  were  not  closely 
affiliated,  except,  perhaps,  in  England.  To  this  class  are 
often  referred  several  masters  of  the  second  rank,  especially 
Hiller,  Bennett,  Gade  and  Reinecke,  with  other  leaders  at 
Leipsic,  although  in  most  cases  these  had  strong  characteristics 
of  their  own  which  widely  distinguished  them  from  Mendels- 
sohn, particularly  as  their  work  continued  for  decades  after  his 
death,  when  they  were  subject  to  altogether  different  influences. 

Ferdinand  Hiller  (d.  1885),  born  in  1811  at  Frankfort,  came  of  a wealthy 
Jewish  family.  There  and  at  Weimar  he  studied  with  Aloys  Schmitt, 
Hummel  and  others,  developing  precociously  as  pianist  and  composer. 
After  visiting  Vienna,  from  1828  he  lived  at  Paris,  playing  much  in  public, 
especially  works  of  Bach  and  Beethoven,  and  associating  with  leading  musi- 
cians. From  1836  he  was  in  Frankfort,  conducting  the  Cacilienverein.  In 
1839  Rossini  paved  the  way  for  his  first  opera  at  Milan,  and  in  1840  Mendels- 
sohn took  up  at  Leipsic  his  effective  oratorio  Die  Zerstorung  Jerusalems. 
After  a year  in  Rome  with  Baini,  in  1843-4  he  conducted  the  Gewandhaus 
concerts,  and  later  produced  two  operas  at  Dresden.  From  1847  he  was 


522 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


town-musician  at  Dusseldorf,  and  from  1850  at  Cologne,  where  he  founded 
the  successful  conservatory.  For  over  30  years  he  remained  active  as  a 
teacher  and  favorite  conductor  throughout  the  Lower  Rhine  district.  His 
works  include  6 operas,  2 oratorios,  several  cantatas,  many  motets,  part-songs 
and  songs,  3 piano-concertos,  many  sonatas,  suites,  dtudes  and  lesser  pieces, 
an  abundance  of  excellent  chamber  music,  4 overtures  and  3 symphonies  — 
all  marked  by  romantic  feeling  and  technical  vigor.  He  also  wrote  important 
essays  and  reminiscences. 

William  Sterndale  Bennett  (d.  1875),  born  at  Sheffield  in  1816,  was  trained 
as  a choirboy  at  Cambridge  and  then  at  the  Royal  Academy  in  London,  where 
in  1833  he  became  known  as  composer  and  pianist.  In  1837  (aided  by  the 
Broadwoods)  and  again  in  1842  he  lived  at  Leipsic,  being  intimate  with 
Mendelssohn  and  Schumann,  and  producing  works  at  the  Gewandhaus.  He 
then  made  his  home  in  London,  giving  chamber  concerts,  founding  the  Bach 
Society  (1844),  conducting  the  Philharmonic  (1856-66),  from  1856  serving 
as  professor  at  Cambridge,  and  from  1866  being  head  of  the  Royal  Academy. 
His  published  works  are  few  and  chiefly  confined  to  the  piano,  including  4 
concertos,  2 sonatas,  2 rondeaux,  a toccata,  2 capriccios,  etc.,  a sextet  for 
piano  and  strings,  4 striking  overtures,  a symphony,  the  pastoral  The  May 
Queen  (1858),  an  oratorio,  The  Woman  of  Samaria  (1867),  festival  odes, 
songs,  part-songs  and  anthems.  His  style  has  individuality,  being  marked 
by  extreme  clarity,  strength  and  even  daring,  but  is  wanting  in  warmth,  so 
that  it  lacks  popular  appeal.  He  presents  interesting  analogies  and  contrasts 
to  both  Mendelssohn  and  Chopin. 

Niels  Wilhelm  Gade  (d.  1890)  was  born  in  1817  at  Copenhagen,  the  son  of 
a joiner  and  instrument-maker,  who  intended  him  to  follow  the  trade.  From 
this  at  15  he  rebelled,  was  taken  up  by  the  violinist  Wexschall  and  the  organ- 
ist Berggreen,  entered  the  court-orchestra  and  blossomed  at  once  into  a 
virtuoso.  His  powers  as  composer  quickly  matured,  and  in  1840  his  overture 
Nachkl'dnge  aus  Ossian  made  a sensation,  winning  in  1841  a prize  and  a royal 
scholarship.  In  1842  came  his  first  symphony,  which  Mendelssohn  repro- 
duced at  Leipsic.  Thither  Gade  went  in  1843,  remaining  five  years,  in  close 
contact  with  Schumann  and  especially  Mendelssohn.  He  was  the  latter’s 
substitute  from  1843  and  his  formal  successor  in  1847.  In  1848  he  returned 
to  Copenhagen,  where  he  became  the  most  efficient  promoter  of  Danish  music, 
universally  respected  and  admired.  He  was  conductor  of  the  Musical  Society 
and  in  1861-83  court-choirmaster.  His  works  consist  chiefly  of  highly  poetic 
cantatas,  such  as  Comala  (1846),  Fruhlingsbotschaft,  Zion,  Die  Kreuzfahrer 
(1876),  Psyche , etc.,  8 strong  symphonies,  5 concert-overtures,  4 violin- 
sonatas,  a violin-concerto,  some  chamber  music,  many  graceful  piano-pieces 
and  a sonata,  many  songs  and  part-songs.  His  style  has  similarities  to  that 
of  Mendelssohn,  but  with  a strong  Scandinavian  flavor  and  a more  poetic 
romanticism.  He  was  gifted  in  orchestration  and  was  a superior  conductor. 
His  adherence  to  Mendelssohnian  models  decreased  in  his  later  years,  when 
he  veered  toward  the  style  of  Schumann. 

On  Reinecke  see  sec.  197.  No  attempt  is  made  here  to  enumerate  the 
many  English  composers  who  pursued  the  paths  opened  by  Mendelssohn 
(see  sec.  223). 


THE  LEIPSIC  ORCHESTRA  AND  CONSERVATORY  523 

196.  The  Gewandhaus  Orchestra  and  the  Leipsic  Conservatory. 

The  artistic  influence  of  the  two  institutions  at  Leipsic  with 
which  Mendelssohn  was  specially  associated  has  been  notably 
pervasive  and  beneficial.  The  Gewandhaus  orchestra  has  had 
a striking  career  of  almost  a century  and  a half,  numbering 
among  its  conductors,  members  and  visiting  artists  a host  of 
great  names.  Especially  from  Mendelssohn’s  advent  in  1835, 
it  has  ranked  as  a model  for  the  musical  world,  though  its  emi- 
nence is  no  longer  unique.  Educationally,  the  conservatory, 
which  from  the  start  has  been  linked  with  the  orchestra  in  the 
closest  affiliation,  has  been  even  more  influential,  since  it  has 
counted  its  pupils  by  hundreds  and  thousands,  drawn  from  all 
Europe  and  from  America.  Its  able  faculty  has  included  many 
who  have  continued  long  in  service,  so  that  its  policy  has  been 
stable  and  its  impression  cumulative.  Thanks  to  the  impulse 
at  its  foundation,  it  has  been  at  once  conservative  and  progres- 
sive, though  usually  not  as  ready  for  novelties  as  some  enthusi- 
asts have  desired.  Unlike  the  Paris  Conservatoire,  its  connec- 
tion with  operatic  music  has  been  comparatively  slight ; but  in 
the  training  of  instrumental  and  vocal  composers  and  of  general 
teachers  it  has  served  a noble  purpose.  It  has  been  the  pattern 
upon  which  a long  list  of  other  schools  have  been  formed. 

The  Gewandhaus  Concerts  properly  date  from  1 763,  when  regular  per- 
formances began  under  J.  A.  Hiller,  though  not  given  in  the  building 
known  as  the  Gewandhaus  until  1781.  At  that  time  the  present  system 
of  government  by  a board  of  directors  began.  The  conductors  during 
the  first  70  years  were  from  1763  J.  A.  Hiller  (d.  1804);  from  1785 
J.  G.  Schicht  (d.  1823)  ; from  1810  Christian  Schulz  (d.  1827)  ; and  from 
1827  Christian  August  Pohlenz  (d.  1843).  The  standard  of  excellence 
was  already  famous.  But  in  1835  Mendelssohn  brought  new  dclat  and 
enterprise,  especially  as  he  soon  had  the  invaluable  help  of  the  violinist 
David.  The  list  of  conductors  has  been  from  1835  Mendelssohn  (d. 
1847)  5 from  1843  Ferdinand  Hiller  (d.  1885)  ; from  1844  Gade  (d. 
1890);  from  1848  Julius  Rietz  (d.  1877)  ; from  i860  Reinecke;  and 
from  1895  Arthur  Nikisch.  In  the  list  of  concertmasters  are  to  be 
named  the  following: — from  1797  Bartolomeo  Campagtioli  (d.  1827); 
from  1817  Heinrich  August  Matthai  (d.  1835)  I from  1836  Ferdinand 
David  (d.  1873),  with  whom  from  1850  was  associated  Raimund  Drey- 
schock  (d.  1869) ; from  1873  Engelbert  Rontgen  (d.  1897),  who  was 
assisted  in  1874-82  by  Henry  Schradieck ; from  1882  Henri  Petri , 
assisted  in  1883-91  by  Adolf  Brodsky,  in  1888  by  Arno  Hilf  and  in  1897 
by  Felix  Berber  (till  1903).  Among  the  other  great  violinists  closely 


524 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


associated  with  David  just  before  1850  were  Wasielewski , later  of  Bonn, 
and  the  young  Joachim,  later  of  Hanover  and  Berlin.  In  the  line  of 
leading ’cellists  have  been  in  1849-60  Friedrich  Griitzmacher ; in  1 859— 
62  Karl  Davidow  (d.  1889);  in  1866-74  Emil  Hegar ; in  1874-81 
Karl  Schroder;  in  188 1-6  his  brother  A twin  Schroder;  and  later 
Julius  Klengel.  Long  terms  of  service  have  been  notable  in  many  other 
cases,  as  for  56  years  from  1777  of  the  double-bassist  Karl  Gottfried 
Wilhelm  Wach  (d.  1833)  ; for  36  years  from  1835  of  the  timpanist  E. 
G.  B.  Pfundt  (d.  1871);  for  45  years  from  1840  of  the  clarinettist 
Bernhardt  Landgraf  (d.  1885)  ; for  29  years  from  1846  of  the  violist 
Friedrich  Hermann  ; for  over  40  years  from  1864  of  the  hornist  Fried- 
rich Adolf  Gumfert  (d.  1906)  ; for  about  25  years  from  1867  of  the 
oboist  Gustav  Adolf  Hinke  (d.  1893);  for  28  years  from  1867  of  the 
flutist  Wilhelm  Barge,  whom  in  1895  Maximilian  Schwedler  followed, 
the  latter  having  been  second  flute  since  1881.  Almost  all  of  these  made 
their  mark  as  virtuosi  and  composers.  Many  other  names  might  be 
given.  No  summary  can  be  offered  of  the  many  virtuosi,  instrumental 
and  vocal,  who  have  appeared  at  the  concerts  during  the  last  hundred 
years,  or  of  the  innumerable  works  performed.  In  1884  the  old  building, 
with  its  fascinating  associations,  was  replaced  by  a splendid  modern  hall. 

The  Leifsic  Conservatory  vs,  indissolubly  connected  with  the  Gewandhaus 
orchestra,  since  from  its  foundation  in  1843  it  was  housed  in  the  same 
complex  of  civic  buildings  and  has  been  directed  usually  by  the  same  officers. 
Mendelssohn  was  the  originator  of  the  whole  plan,  the  one  who  secured  the 
assignment  of  20,000  thalers  from  the  king  of  Saxony  which  was  the  first 
pecuniary  basis,  and  the  inspirer  of  the  first  teachers  and  students.  But 
his  leadership  was  brief.  The  directors  since  his  time  have  been  from  1847 
Konrad  Schleinitz  (d.  1881)  ; from  1881  Otto  Gunther  (d.  1897)  ; and 
from  1897  Karl  Reinecke.  The  distinguished  theory-teachers  have  been 
from  1843  Hauftmann  (d.  1868)  ; from  1843  also  E.  F.  Richter  (d. 
1879)  > m 1848-60  Julius  Rietz  (d.  1877)  ; from  1851  Robert  Papperitz 
(d.  1903)  ; from  i860  Reinecke  ; from  1869  Oscar  Paul  (d.  1898)  ; from 
1871  Jadassohn  (d.  1902)  ; and  in  1872-83  and  from  1897  Alfred  Richter. 
Among  the  piano-teachers  have  been  in  1843-65  Louis  Plaidy  (d. 
1874)  ; from  1843  Ernst  Wenzel  (d.  1880)  ; from  1846  Ignaz  Mo - 
scheles  (d.  1870);  from  i860  Reinecke;  from  1864  Theodor  Coccius 
(d.  1897);  from  187 3 Johannes  Weidenbach  (d.  1902);  in  1875-98 
Bruno  Zivintscher  ; from  1877  Alois  Reckendorf ; and  from  1886, 
Adolf  Ruthardt.  The  violin-teachers  include  from  the  Gewandhaus 
leaders  David,  Dreyschock , Rontgen , and  Brodsky,  with  the  violist  Fried- 
rich Hermann  and,  since  1883,  Hans  Sitt.  The  ’cellists  Griitzmacher, 
Davidow , Hegar,  the  Schroders,  and  Klengel  have  likewise  shared  their 
energies.  Among  the  vocal  teachers  have  been  in  1853-67  Franz 
Gotze  (d.  1888);  and  from  1877  Friedrich  Rebling  (d.  1900).  The 
first  teacher  of  music-history  was  Bretulel  (d.  1868)  ; and  the  first  organ- 
teacher  (till  1856)  K.  F.  Becker  (d.  1877).  No  account  is  possible  of 
the  multitude  of  talented  and  famous  pupils  that  have  been  sent  out.  In 
1887  the  conservator)'  was  housed  in  a fine  new  building  of  its  own 


VARIOUS  LEIPSIC  MUSICIANS 


525 


Among  the  many  musical  societies  of  the  city  the  oldest  and  most  noted 
is  the  Euterpe , whose  concerts  have  been  led  by  many  able  conductors, 
and  in  whose  programs  have  been  famous  renderings  of  many  new  and 
‘advanced’  works.  Among  the  conductors  are  these  names:  — about 
1840  Jean  Verhulst  (d.  1891);  in  the  ^o's,  August  Ferdinand  Riccius 
(d.  1886),  Hermann  Langer  (d.  1889)  and  Julius  von  Bernuth  (d.  1902)  ; 
in  the  ’6o’s,  Hans  von  Bronsart , Adolf  Blassmann  (d.  1891)  and  Robert 
Heckjnann  (d.  1891),  with  Jadassohn  as  assistant;  in  the  ’7o’s,  Alfred 
Volkland,  Johanti  Svendsen  and  Wilhelm  Treiber  (d.  1899)  5 and  in 
1 88 1 -6  Paul  Klengel. 

The  Riedel-Verein  was  founded  in  1854  by  Karl  Riedel  (d.  1888),  who 
remained  the  conductor  till  his  death,  being  succeeded  by  Hermann 
Kretzschmar  (till  1897),  and  he  in  turn  by  Jean  Louis  Nicode  and  then 
by  Karl  Georg  G'dhler. 

In  the  long  line  of  conductors  at  the  theatre  or  the  opera  may  be  men- 
tioned in  1800-10  Christia?i  Schulz  (d.  1827);  in  1810-21  Friedrich 
Schneider  (d.  1853);  in  1826-31  Marschner  (d.  1861);  in  1844-5 
Lortzing  (d.  1851)  and  Joseph  Netzer  (d.  1864);  in  1847-54  Julius 
Rietz  (d.  1877)  ; in  1854-64  A.  F.  Riccius  (1886)  ; etc. 

Among  the  Leipsic  organists  to  achieve  reputation  were,  at  the 
Thomaskirche,  from  1801  Johann  Georg  Hermann  Voigt  (d.  1811), 
from  1812  Friedrich  Schneider  (d.  1853),  in  1814-22  F.  W.  Riem  (d. 
1857),  from  1827  C.  A.  Pohlenz  (d.  1843),  [from  1843  apparently 
Hauptmann  (d.  1868),]  from  1869  Louis  Papier  (d.  1878),  from  1878 
Wilhelm  Rust  (d.  1892)  ; at  the  Petrikirche  and  Nikolaikirche,  in  1825- 
56  K.  F.  Becker  (d.  1877),  from  1851  E.  F.  Richter  (d.  1879)  ? at  the 
latter  alone,  in  1868-99  Robert  Papperitz  (d.  1903)  ; and  at  the  Johan- 
niskirche,  from  1878  Robert  Schaab  (d.  1887) — besides  the  virtuoso 
Christian  Fink , living  here  in  1853-60.  Among  the  pianists  and  piano- 
teachers  the  more  distinguished  were  until  1840  Friedrich  Wieck  (d. 
1873)  ; until  1844  his  daughter  Clara  Schumann  (d.  1896)  ; from  1831 
Julius  Knorr  (d.  1861);  from  about  1835  Heinrich  Encke  (d.  1859); 
from  1846  J.  C.  Lobe  (d.  1881)  ; from  1852  Jadassohn  (after  1871  in  the 
conservatory);  from  1867  Heinrich  Wohlfahrt  (d.  1883);  from  about 
1870  Moritz  Vogel;  in  1872-85  Heinrich  von  Herzogenberg  (d.  1900)  ; 
and  from  1872  Alexander  Winterberger.  A noted  vocal  teacher  and 
organizer  of  choral  societies  from  1820  was  Karl  Zollner  (d.  i860), 
who  in  1833  started  the  Zolltier-Verein,  which  after  his  death  grew  into 
the  extensive  Zollnerbund. 

Of  those  best  known  as  composers,  besides  many  in  the  above  lists,  it 
may  be  added  that  here  in  1827-33  Wagiier  came  to  the  first  conscious- 
ness of  his  mission  ; that  here  in  1833-44  Lo7‘tzing  made  his  first  operatic 
ventures,  though  with  but  slight  success  ; that  here  from  1842  worked  the 
original  Hermann  Hirschbach  (d.  1888),  from  about  1850  the  gifted  Eng- 
lishman Pierson  (d.  1873),  from  J^59  the  opera-writer  Franz  von  Holstein 
(d.  1878),  from  about  1865  the  popular  writer  of  dramatic  works  Victor 
Nessler  (d.  1890),  and  in  1875-83  the  piano-composer  Kirchner  (d.  1903), 
a student  under  Mendelssohn  and  Schumann  over  30  years  before. 


526 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


197.  Certain  Other  Leipsic  Masters.  — The  disability  of  Schu- 
mann and  the  early  death  of  Mendelssohn  removed  them  from  the 
Leipsic  circle  before  1850.  But  the  vigor  of  the  Leipsic  influence 
was  maintained  by  other  leaders,  individually  less  original,  but 
of  collective  significance.  Since  Mendelssohn  himself  had  been 
deeply  interested  in  the  structural  side  of  composition  and  had 
busied  himself  almost  wholly  upon  instrumental  and  choral 
forms,  and  since  he  naturally  gathered  about  him  those  whose 
interests  were  similar,  the  distinctive  drift  of  his  circle  was  em- 
phatically conservative.  The  elaboration  of  harmony  and  coun- 
terpoint in  symmetrical  and  logical  forms  was  exalted,  with 
only  such  expansions  of  the  older  classical  procedure  as  could 
be  readily  deduced.  Hence,  on  the  whole,  Leipsic  influence 
was  against  the  free  expression  of  peculiar  individuality,  of  in- 
tense or  whimsical  moods,  and  of  picturesquely  novel  ideas.  In 
all  this  it  was  not  in  harmony  with  many  of  Schumann’s  impulses 
nor  with  the  cravings  of  many  younger  radicals.  The  depart- 
ments of  composition  which  it  specially  favored  were  orchestral 
and  chamber  writing,  piano  works  of  careful  workmanship,  and 
dignified  choral  music.  To  the  opera  in  all  its  varieties  it  paid 
comparatively  little  attention.  Its  ambition  was  to  foster  solid 
and  serious  creation  for  its  own  sake  without  caring  whether  or 
not  the  results  were  popularly  sensational  or  spectacular.  Here 
it  stood  in  opposition  to  several  other  tendencies  of  the  time. 
Naturally  enough,  those  who  were  deeply  moved  by  these  ten- 
dencies found  the  Leipsic  circle  staid  and  even  reactionary. 

The  two  older  members  of  the  group  were  Hauptmann  and  Moscheles, 
both  leaders  in  the  conservatory  staff. 

Moritz  Hauptmann  (d.  1868)  lived  during  exactly  the  same  years  as 
Rossini,  being  born  at  Dresden  in  1792.  He  was  an  architect’s  son  and  was 
first  trained  for  that  profession.  Incidental  musical  study  brought  out  his 
latent  gifts  and  led  to  his  seeking  Spohr’s  instruction  at  Gotha  in  1811. 
From  1812  he  was  a violinist  in  the  Dresden  court-orchestra,  besides  teach- 
ing in  the  household  of  Prince  Repnin,  who  in  1813-4  was  the  Russian 
governor  of  the  city.  From  1815  he  was  with  the  Prince  in  Italy  and  then 
at  St.  Petersburg,  Moscow  and  Pultowa,  employed  in  many  noble  families. 
He  also  kept  up  mathematical  studies,  with  special  attention  to  acoustics. 
In  1820  he  returned  to  Dresden,  and  from  1822  was  violinist  in  the  court- 
orchestra  at  Cassel  under  Spohr,  now  evincing  power  as  a theorist,  training 
many  fine  pupils  and  putting  forth  violin  and  chamber  music,  choral  works, 
songs  and  the  opera  Mathilde  (1826),  written  with  careful  finish.  From  1842, 
at  the  urgency  of  Mendelssohn  and  Spohr,  he  was  made  cantor  of  the 


VARIOUS  LEIPSIC  MUSICIANS 


527 


Thomasschule  at  Leipsic  and  in  1843  professor  of  counterpoint  and  com- 
position in  the  new  conservatory.  He  became  one  of  the  chief  factors  in  the 
school’s  success,  impressing  himself  upon  hosts  of  pupils  for  25  years  and 
winning  many  official  honors.  His  theory  and  practice  placed  the  highest 
value  upon  clear,  vigorous  construction  and  perfection  of  detail,  but  his  spirit 
was  so  broad  that  he  held  the  respect  of  many  who  were  less  conservative. 
His  writings  included  Die  Natur  der  Harmonik  und  Metrik  (1853),  Die 
Lehre  von  der  Harmonik  (1868),  an  exposition  of  Bach’s  Art  of  Fugue , 
some  essays  (collected  1874),  and  many  letters  (collected  1871-6).  In  these 
he  made  a powerful  contribution  to  modern  theory,  and  also  exhibited  a 
masterly  conception  of  musical  art.  His  theoretic  system,  resting  upon  an 
analysis  of  tonality  in  its  major  and  minor  dualism,  has  been  further  de- 
veloped by  Arthur  von  Oettingen  of  Dorpat  (in  1866),  by  Otto  Tiersch  of  Berlin 
(from  1868),  by  Adolf  Thiirlings  of  Bonn  (in  1877),  by  Ottokar  Hostinsky  of 
Prague  (from  1877)  and  by  Hugo  Riemann  (from  1880). 

Ignaz  Moscheles  (d.  1870)  has  already  been  treated  (see  sec.  180).  His 
influence  was  more  conservative  than  that  of  Hauptmann. 

Close  contemporaries  of  Mendelssohn  and  Schumann  were  the  following : — 

Ernst  Friedrich  Richter  (d.  1879),  born  Saxony  in  1808,  educated  at 
Zittau  and  Leipsic  (pupil  of  Weinlig),  became  Hauptmann’s  assistant  at  the 
Conservatory  in  1843  and  in  1868,  after  leading  the  Singakademie  in  1843-7 
and  serving  from  1851  as  organist  at  three  of  the  city  churches,  his  successor 
as  cantor  at  the  Thomasschule.  He  was  an  excellent  teacher  and  published 
valuable  text-books  on  harmony,  counterpoint  and  fugue  (1853-72).  He  was 
also  a sound  and  effective  composer  of  both  instrumental  and  choral  music, 
including  the  oratorio  Christus  der  Er loser  (1849). 

Ferdinand  David  (d.  1873)  was  the  third  in  the  great  triumvirate  with 
Hauptmann  and  Moscheles.  Born  in  1810  at  Hamburg,  he  early  had  instruc- 
tion from  Spohr  and  Hauptmann  at  Cassel,  at  15  appeared  as  violinist  at  the 
Gewandhaus,  from  1827  played  in  a theatre-orchestra  at  Berlin,  from  1829  was 
leader  in  the  private  quartet  of  a noble  at  Dorpat  (whose  daughter  became 
his  wife),  and  was  well  known  as  a concert-player  throughout  Russia  till  1835. 
In  1836  Mendelssohn  secured  him  as  concertmaster  for  the  Gewandhaus  and 
in  1843  engaged  him  in  the  conservatory.  In  both  positions  he  won  world- 
wide renown  as  virtuoso,  trainer  and  inspirer,  so  that  to  him  much  of  the 
Leipsic  prestige  must  be  attributed.  He  was  not  only  a great  interpreter  in 
the  noble  style  of  Spohr,  but  a strong  composer  for  his  instrument  and  for 
chamber  and  orchestral  combinations,  besides  one  opera  (1852),  and  the 
author  of  a foremost  method  and  numerous  standard  editions  of  violin-classics. 

Julius  Rietz  (d.  1877),  born  in  1812,  was  brought  up  at  Berlin  in  the  same 
general  circle  with  Mendelssohn,  and  was  trained  as  a ’cellist,  playing  in  a 
theatre-orchestra  from  1828.  In  1834  he  became  Mendelssohn’s  assistant  at 
Diisseldorf  and  in  1835  his  successor,  first  as  opera-conductor,  later  as  town- 
musician,  besides  touring  as  a virtuoso.  In  1847-54  he  was  conductor  at  the 
Leipsic  theatre  and  the  Singakademie,  and  from  1848  also  conductor  at  the 
Gewandhaus  and  professor  of  composition  in  the  conservatory.  In  i860  he 
removed  to  Dresden  to  be  court-choirmaster  and  later  also  the  artistic  head 


528 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


of  the  conservatory  there.  He  was  an  accomplished  conductor  and  a worthy 
conservative  composer.  His  works  included  3 symphonies,  notably  that  in 
E^,  several  good  overtures,  such  as  the  Lustspielouvertiire , ’cello,  violin, 
clarinet  and  piano-concertos,  violin,  flute  and  piano-sonatas,  a great  amount  of 
church  and  other  choral  music,  and  songs,  besides  4 operas  (1833-59).  He 
did  important  work  as  the  editor  of  standard  editions  of  classical  masters, 
including  Mendelssohn.  He  was  uncompromising  in  his  opposition  to  radical 
tendencies,  making  many  enemies  in  consequence. 

Considerably  younger  than  the  above  are  two  more  — 

Karl  Reinecke  is  one  of  the  most  interesting  figures  in  the  group.  He  was 
born  of  musical  parentage  at  Altona  in  1 824,  and  developed  into  a piano-virtuoso, 
appearing  in  Denmark  and  Sweden  in  1843.  After  study  with  Mendelssohn 
and  Schumann  at  Leipsic  and  further  tours,  in  1846-8  he  was  court-pianist 
at  Copenhagen.  Thence  he  went  to  Paris,  in  1851-4  taught  in  the  Cologne 
conservatory,  in  1854-9  was  town-musician  at  Barmen,  and  in  1859-60  con- 
ductor at  Breslau.  In  i860  he  came  to  the  Gewandhaus  and  the  conserva- 
tory at  Leipsic,  where  he  has  filled  out  almost  a half-century  of  fruitful  teaching 
and  composing,  with  frequent  tours  as  a favorite  classical  pianist.  In  1895 
gave  up  his  post  as  conductor,  and  in  1897  became  head  of  the  conservatory. 
His  regime  as  conductor  was  marked  by  a somewhat  rigid  adherence  to  the 
standards  of  Mendelssohn.  His  over  250  works  cover  a wide  range  — 3 
symphonies,  9 concert-overtures,  incidental  music  to  Schiller’s  ‘ William  Tell,’ 
a string-serenade,  concertos  for  violin,  ’cello,  harp  and  piano  (4),  a quintet 
and  a quartet  with  piano,  4 string-quartets  and  7 trios,  4 violin-sonatas,  3 
’cello-sonatas,  many  piano-sonatas  and  sonatinas,  characteristic  pieces,  studies, 
etc.,  6 operas  and  operettas  (from  1867),  the  oratorio  Belsazar , many  cantatas, 
2 masses,  and  very  many  part-songs  and  songs.  His  style  is  marked  by  sound 
learning  and  fresh  versatility,  and  furnishes  an  interesting  continuation  into 
the  later  period  of  Mendelssohn’s  type  of  romanticism. 

Salomon  Jadassohn  (d.  1902),  born  in  1831  and  first  trained  at  Breslau, 
studied  from  1848  at  Leipsic  under  Hauptmann  and  one  year  at  Weimar 
under  Liszt,  and  taught  at  Leipsic  from  1852.  After  short  terms  as  conductor 
of  the  Psalterion  chorus  and  the  Euterpe  concerts,  from  1871  he  was  professor 
of  composition  and  instrumentation  in  the  conservatory,  where  he  became  re- 
nowned as  teacher  and  composer.  Besides  able  text-books  (1883-95),  he 
wrote  some  130  strong  and  often  brilliant  works,  including  4 symphonies,  4 
serenades,  2 overtures,  a piano-concerto,  much  chamber  music,  a psalm  and 
several  choral  ballades,  motets,  duets,  songs  and  piano-pieces,  some  of  which 
evince  extraordinary  contrapuntal  facility. 


CHAPTER  XXXII 


NEW  LIGHTS  UPON  PIANISM 

198.  Chopin  as  a Tone-Poet.  — During  almost  precisely  the 
same  years  as  Mendelssohn  lived  the  Polish  pianist  and  com- 
poser Chopin,  contributing  to  musical  art  an  influence  that  has 
been  singularly  potent  and  persistent.  Representing  a different 
racial  stock  and  moved  by  a peculiar  national  spirit,  Chopin 
gave  voice  to  an  intense  and  poignant  strain  of  poetic  roman- 
ticism that  was  eminently  original  and  fresh.  His  genius  was  ma- 
tured before  the  world  at  large  knew  much  about  it,  but,  when 
he  stepped  forth  into  publicity,  his  captivating  qualities  as  a 
virtuoso  made  his  style  instantly  famous.  His  choice  of  Paris 
as  a residence  introduced  him  to  a society  specially  sensitive  to 
his  artistic  type.  But  the  sentiments  and  the  forms  that  he 
loved  lay  so  close  to  the  modern  spirit  generally  that  he  stands 
out  as  an  artist,  not  merely  of  a nation  or  a social  class,  but 
at  least  of  a period,  if  not  of  a constant  aspect  of  experience. 
Accordingly,  his  works,  though  relatively  few  and  almost  wholly 
confined  to  a single  field,  have  become  standard  everywhere  in 
both  public  and  private  use. 

Emotionally,  Chopin  presents  many  contradictions,  from  lan- 
guorous dreaminess  and  voluptuousness  to  fiery  and  heroic  ardor, 
from  a sentimentality  that  verges  upon  the  morbid  to  noble  viril- 
ity. But  this  mixture  of  qualities  is  not  unusual,  and  in  his  case 
the  directness  with  which  they  were  revealed  and  the  consum- 
mate art  with  which  they  were  embodied  give  his  works  an 
extraordinary  appeal.  His  passionateness  and  pathos  may  well 
be  traced  to  the  tragic  national  history  into  which  he  was  born, 
but  his  symmetry  of  form,  his  exquisite  feeling  for  tonal  beauty, 
his  delicacy  of  detail,  his  finesse  in  planning  his  effects  — all 
these  recall  rather  the  Gallic  element  in  his  blood.  In  the 
perfect  unity  and  balance  between  conception  and  form,  his  style 
resembles  Mendelssohn’s,  but  the  difference  in  materials  and 
impulses  was  extreme. 


2 M 


529 


530 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


Technically,  Chopin  was  almost  wholly  a lyric  artist,  usually 
choosing  forms  that  are  song-like  in  essence.  Within  this 
field  he  followed  methods  that  were  not  radically  different  from 
classical  practice,  except  that  his  melodies  were  more  flexible, 
more  expanded,  much  fuller  of  sensuous  warmth.  But  he  drew 
his  song-patterns  from  new  sources,  having  often  singular 
pathos  or  picturesqueness.  And  he  treated  his  materials  in  de- 
tail without  being  governed  by  the  ordinary  conventions  of  har- 
mony or  counterpoint.  He  had  but  slight  impulse  to  true 
thematic  development  and  but  small  power  in  the  architectonic 
handling  of  complex  tonal  processes.  But,  on  the  other  hand, 
he  had  extreme  facility  in  melodic  invention,  an  absolutely  fresh 
insight  into  the  capacities  of  the  piano,  and  a marvelous  gift  for 
decoration  and  color.  Some  intimations  of  progress  in  these  di- 
rections had  already  appeared,  but  the  advance  that  he  achieved 
was  superbly  rapid  and  sure.  The  art  of  pianism  as  an  indepen- 
dent specialty  took  on  a new  importance  under  his  hand. 

Fr6d6ric  Chopin  (d.  1849)  was  born  in  1810  at  a village  not  far  from  War- 
saw. As  a young  man  his  father  had  come  to  Poland  in  1787  from  Nancy 
(E.  France)  and,  after  business  and  military  experience,  was  from  about  1805 
a private  tutor,  from  1810  teacher  in  the  new  Lyceum  and  later  in  a school  of 
his  own.  His  mother  was  of  a good  Polish  family.  Of  the  four  children, 
two  older  sisters  lived  to  become  talented  writers.  Chopin’s  early  years  fell 
amidst  dark  times  for  his  country.  The  infamous  partitions  of  Poland  (1772- 
95)  had  given  most  of  it  to  Russia  and  were  still  bitterly  resented  — the  con- 
stant unrest  culminating  in  1830  in  the  first  of  several  fruitless  insurrections. 
Probably  the  Chopin  family  suffered  from  the  situation,  since  their  livelihood 
depended  upon  people  in  high  society. 

Chopin  received  a fair  education,  the  best  of  it  being  in  music.  His  first 
master  was  the  Bohemian  Zywny,  a worthy  teacher  of  the  old  school.  At  9 
he  played  a piano-concerto  in  public,  and  soon  after  began  some  composition. 
At  14  he  entered  the  Lyceum,  where  he  was  noted  for  his  spirits  and  his  dra- 
matic talent,  and  began  lessons  with  Eisner,  the  head  of  the  young  conserva- 
tory and  a wise,  intelligent  teacher.  At  15  (1825)  he  put  forth  his  first 
published  work,  though  he  had  previously  written  several  dances.  Leaving 
the  Lyceum  in  1827,  he  concentrated  upon  music  to  such  purpose  that  many 
other  works  were  produced,  and  in  1829,  when  he  was  induced  to  play  at 
Vienna,  he  scored  a real  success.  In  1830  he  gave  three  memorable  farewell 
concerts  at  Warsaw  and  then  set  out  for  Breslau,  Dresden,  Prague,  Vienna, 
Munich  and  Stuttgart,  whence  in  the  fall  of  1831  he  passed  on  to  Paris.  At 
Stuttgart  he  heard  of  the  capture  of  Warsaw  by  the  Russians  and  the  collapse 
of  the  insurrection. 

His  nationality,  his  high-bred,  aristocratic  ways,  and  the  charm  of  his  art 
speedily  brought  him  into  notice.  His  virtuosity  was  not  unrivaled,  but  his 


CHOPIN 


53 


lack  of  sonority  and  his  comparative  feebleness  as  an  interpreter  of  others’ 
works  were  made  up  by  the  beauty  of  his  own  ideas  and  the  perfection  with 
which  he  set  them  forth.  He  at  once  became  intimate  with  leading  musi- 
cians, including  such  varied  types  as 
the  aged  Cherubini,  the  ambitious 
Rossini,  the  facile  Auber,  the  poetic 
young  Bellini,  the  caustic  and  eccen- 
tric Berlioz,  the  laborious  Meyerbeer, 
the  egotistic  Kalkbrenner  (from  whom 
he  had  some  quasi-lessons),  the  ar- 
dent Liszt,  the  buoyant  Mendelssohn 
(then  on  his  grand  tour),  and  many 
others.  His  genius  was  effusively  ac- 
claimed by  Schumann  in  Leipsic. 

From  1832  he  began  concert-giving 
and  teaching,  besides  publishing  from 
time  to  time.  Though  much  courted 
by  ‘ society,’  and  aspiring  “ to  create 
a new  art-era,”  he  had  not  the  phys- 
ical or  mental  verve  to  be  a leader 
or  to  command  a steady  income. 

(He  is  said  even  to  have  meditated 
coming  to  America!)  His  public  appearances  as  a player  ceased  with 
1835,  when  the  weakness  of  his  constitution  began  to  be  seen.  In  1834 
he  attended  the  festival  at  Aix-la-Chapelle,  and  in  1835  and  ’36  visited 
Dresden  and  Leipsic,  coming  into  close  contact  with  the  Mendelssohn 
circle  and  with  Schumann.  In  1837  he  made  a trip  to  England,  partly 
for  his  health. 

Late  in  1836  began  his  strange  and  regrettable  intimacy  with  ‘George 
Sand  ’ (Mme.  Dudevant),  the  restless,  sophistical  and  coarse  novelist. 
With  her  in  1838-9  he  went  to  Majorca,  where  he  fell  seriously  ill  — the 
beginning  of  the  fatal  consumption.  Afterwards  they  lived  in  Paris  or 
Nohant.  During  this  period  he  issued  many  of  his  finest  works,  and  occa- 
sionally played  at  concerts  for  his  friends  and  admirers.  In  1847  he  and 
George  Sand  parted ; probably  she  was  tired  of  him.  Late  in  that  year  came 
out  his  last  work,  and  early  in  1848  he  played  once  more  in  a private  concert. 
The  approach  of  the  Revolution  drove  him  to  England,  where,  in  spite  of  his 
failing  health,  he  made  some  private  appearances  at  London,  Manchester, 
Glasgow  and  Edinburgh.  Returning  to  Paris,  he  died  there  in  1849,  and  was 
accorded  a stately  funeral  at  the  Madeleine. 

The  most  salient  of  his  personal  characteristics  were  his  sentimental 
sensitiveness  and  his  instinctive  refinement.  He  had  great  fascination  for 
many  persons,  was  considerate  and  often  impulsively  generous,  at  times  dis- 
played ardent  enthusiasms,  but  was  prone  also  to  periods  of  extreme  dejec- 
tion. Intellectually,  he  was  acute  and  appreciative,  occasionally  indulging  in 
keen  criticism.  He  lacked  vigor  of  purpose  and  loftiness  of  aim  — a typical 
poet  of  the  introspective  order.  His  life  moved  wholly  within  the  ways  and 
the  feelings  of  aristocratic  society,  which  was  his  world. 


532 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


His  works  are  almost  wholly  for  the  piano  and  in  dance-forms  or  song- 
forms.  They  include  (a)  over  50  mazurkas,  15  waltzes,  nearly  as  many  polo- 
naises (one  with  ’cello),  4 scherzos,  the  Marche  futtibre , a bolero,  a tarentelle  ; 
(b)  19  nocturnes,  25  preludes,  27  Etudes,  4 ballades,  5 rondos  (one  with 
orchestra  and  one  for  two  pianos),  3 impromptus,  a berceuse,  a barcarolle, 
3 fantasias  (two  with  orchestra),  3 variations ; ( c ) 4 sonatas  (one  for  ’cello), 
2 piano-concertos,  a trio  for  piano  and  strings.  He  also  left  a small  group  of 
Polish  songs. 

To  pianism  proper  Chopin  contributed  a wealth  of  delicate 
embellishments  and  refinements,  including  original  melodic  and 
accompaniment  figures,  with  important  dynamic  and  rhythmic 
devices  (such  as  a fresh  use  of  the  ‘ tempo  rubato  ’),  which  much 
increased  the  resources  of  expressive  effect.  He  discarded  the 
rigidity  or  quiescence  of  the  hand  and  arm  in  favor  of  absolute 
elasticity.  Beauty  of  tone  and  shading  he  exalted  above  dex- 
terity, though  his  filigree-passages  call  for  extreme  fluency. 
The  ingenious  use  of  the  pedals  now  becomes  an  important 
factor  in  artistic  impression. 

Here  may  well  be  mentioned  the  names  of  a number  of  pianists  who  either 
were  Poles  or  worked  long  at  Warsaw,  viz : — the  Bohemian  Wilhelm  Wiirfel 
(d.  1852),  in  1 81 5-26. teacher  in  Eisner’s  school  and  later  at  Vienna;  Maria 
(Wolowska)  Szymanowska  (d.  1832),  one  of  Field’s  pupils  who,  while  living 
at  Warsaw,  was  court-pianist  at  St.  Petersburg  and  well  known  in  Germany; 
Albert  Sowinsky  (d.  1880),  trained  at  Vienna  and  from  1830  a teacher  and 
player  at  Paris;  Jozef  Nowakowski  (d.  1865),  Chopin’s  fellow-student  and 
finally,  after  tours,  a teacher  at  Warsaw,  with  about  60  piano  and  orchestral 
works;  Ignacy  FSlix  Dobrzynski  (d.  1867),  another  comrade  of  Chopin’s 
both  in  Warsaw  and  in  Paris,  who  also  returned  to  Warsaw  as  an  opera- 
conductor,  with  many  strongly  national  piano-pieces  and  songs,  some  cham- 
ber music,  a symphony,  2 operas,  etc. ; Edouard  Wolff  (d.  1880),  still  a third 
close  friend  and  imitator  of  Chopin,  settled  from  1835  at  Paris,  with  numerous 
piano  works,  many  of  them  valuable,  nearly  40  striking  duos  for  piano  and 
violin  (written  with  De  Bdriot  and  Vieuxtemps),  a concerto  — about  350  in 
all;  Antoine  de  Kontski  (d.  1899),  an  effective  and  indefatigable  virtuoso, 
whose  headquarters  were  successively  Paris,  Berlin,  St.  Petersburg,  London 
and  Buffalo,  N.Y. — the  brother  of  the  violinist  Apollinaire  de  Kontski  (d. 
1879),  who,  after  tours  and  service  at  St.  Petersburg,  founded  a school  at 
Warsaw;  Aloys  Tausig  (d.  1885),  a pupil  of  Thalberg,  from  about  1840  a 
favorite  teacher  at  Warsaw  (where  his  son  Karl  was  born  in  1841),  later  going 
to  Dresden ; not  to  speak  of  many  later  teachers  at  the  conservatory,  like 
Ferdinand  Quentin  Dulcken  (d.  1902),  the  brilliant  Alexander  Zarzycki  (d. 
1895),  head  of  the  conservatory  from  1879,  the  able  Joseph  Wieniawski, 
working  here  about  1870,  and  the  now  famous  Ignace  Jan  Paderewski,  first  a 
pupil  and  in  1878-83  a teacher.  With  these  should  be  grouped  Karl  Mikuli 


SALON  MUSIC 


533 


(d.  1897),  a pupil  of  Chopin  in  1844-8,  who,  after  touring  in  Russia  and 
other  Slavic  countries,  was  from  1858  head  of  the  Lemberg  conservatory  and 
from  1888  of  a school  of  his  own,  and  whose  edition  of  Chopin’s  works  is 
critically  important.  He  also  composed  in  Chopin’s  style. 

Akin  to  Chopin  and  for  a time  associated  with  him  at  Paris  was  Stephen 
Heller  (d.  1888),  who  was  born  in  Hungary  in  1815  and  trained  by  Halm  at 
Vienna.  From  1827  he  became  known  as  a concert-player  there,  in  Hungary 
and  Poland,  and  later  in  Germany.  After  spending  some  years  quietly  at 
Augsburg,  in  1838  he  went  to  Paris,  where,  except  for  a few  tours,  he  lived 
for  50  years.  His  temperament  was  too  sensitive  to  make  him  a thoroughly 
successful  virtuoso,  but  under  congenial  conditions  his  playing  was  full  of 
grace  and  vivacity.  He  wrote  several  hundred  short  piano  works  — charac- 
teristic pieces,  ballades,  etudes,  nocturnes,  songs  without  words,  dances,  etc. 
— full  of  healthy  poetry,  with  great  daintiness  of  rhythm  and  figure.  In 
genuine  invention  they  compare  well  with  Mendelssohn’s,  in  structure  are 
stronger  than  Chopin’s,  and  in  imagination  recall  Schumann. 

199.  Salon  Music.  — In  conjunction  with  the  spread  of  the  ro- 
mantic spirit,  the  general  adoption  of  pianism  as  a specialty  from 
about  1825  led  to  a striking  multiplication  of  small  piano  works 
in  forms  not  previously  conspicuous.  The  vogue  of  these  has 
always  been  due  to  their  intimate  or  personal  character,  and 
their  adaptation  to  domestic  use  or  the  smaller  functions  of 
polite  society.  This  type  received  a powerful  impetus  from  com- 
posers like  Schubert,  Schumann,  Mendelssohn  and  Chopin.  For 
them  this  was  an  inevitable  result  of  their  search  for  tone-forms 
to  express  relatively  transient  moods  and  fancies  — an  irrepress- 
ible outbreak  of  lyricism.  But  the  expansion  of  the  style  into 
immense  proportions  was  due  to  workers  of  much  lower  degree, 
whose  call  to  action  was  often  the  mere  popular  demand  for 
graceful  and  * pretty  ’ bagatelles,  and  whose  method  had  more 
cleverness  than  inspiration.  The  term  ‘ salon  music  ’ has  ac- 
quired a more  or  less  disparaging  sense  in  consequence.  Yet 
all  writing  in  this  style  is  not  necessarily  sentimentally  vapid 
or  structurally  mechanical.  When  the  small  piano-form  has 
been  touched  by  the  hand  of  genius  it  has  had  the  same  real 
and  concentrated  beauty  as  that  of  a fine  miniature  or  a delicate 
aquarelle.  And,  even  in  its  shallower  illustrations,  parlor  music 
is  a large  social  force,  bringing  myriads  of  persons  into  touch 
with  tonal  art  and  serving  at  least  as  an  introduction  to  larger 
things.  As  a type,  it  is  dangerous  only  when  known  in  its 
poorer  examples  alone  and  when  cultivated  wholly  out  of  rela- 
tion to  other  types. 


534 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


The  forms  most  used  are  naturally  either  songs  or  dances,  both  of 
which  are  essentially  lyrical.  The  many  song-patterns  have  been  de- 
scribed by  a great  variety  of  names,  not  always  used  consistently,  such 
as  4 song  without  words,’  ‘ romance,’  4 nocturne,’  4 reverie,’ i ballade,’  4 fan- 
tasie,’  4 caprice,’  4 dtude,’  etc.  More  indefinite  terms  are  4 impromptu,’ 
‘prelude,’  ‘albumblatt,’  4 charakterstiick,’  etc.  Often  a picturesque  sug- 
gestion is  given  by  titles  like  4 kinderscenen,’  4 flower-song,’  and  the  like. 
The  dance-patterns  most  used  are  the  waltz,  the  mazurka,  the  polonaise, 
the  galop  and  many  others  of  the  large  class  of  modern  round  dances, 
most  of  them  in  triple  rhythm. 

The  two  centres  from  which  salon  music  in  its  lighter  forms 
was  specially  propagated  before  or  near  the  middle  of  the  cen- 
tury were  Paris  and  Vienna,  and  they  have  continued  to  be 
prominent.  But  players  and  publishers  carried  it  everywhere, 
calling  out  production  in  all  countries.  Furthermore,  at  both 
these  centres  and  in  Germany  and  northern  Europe  generally 
the  making  of  brief,  characteristic  piano-pieces  of  decided  artis- 
tic quality  soon  became  a specialty,  supplying  a charming  and 
useful  element  in  musical  literature. 

Reserving  for  longer  mention  the  most  distinguished  composers  and 
players,  it  may  here  be  noted  that  the  French  group,  including  Belgians, 
Spaniards  and  some  others,  contains  names  like  these:  — Franz  Hiinten  of 
Coblentz  (d.1878);  Pedro  Albeniz  (d.  1855),  from  1830  active  at  Madrid; 
Camille  Marie  Stamaty  (d.  1870),  who  from  1835  pushed  his  way  into  the 
front  rank  of  Parisian  teachers,  producing  important  dtudes,  etc. ; Henri 
Rosellen  (d.  1876)  ; Charles  Henri  Valentin  Alkan  (d.  1888)  ; the  accom- 
plished Antoine  Francois  Marmontel  (d.  1898),  from  1832  a player  of  mark 
and  from  1848  one  of  the  best  teachers  at  the  Conservatoire,  with  numerous 
didactic  works  ; Jacques  Mathieu  Joseph  Gregoir  (d.  1876),  from  1848  teacher 
at  Brussels  ; Ignace  Leybach  (d.  1891),  from  1844  organist  at  Toulouse;  Jean 
Henri  Ravina,  in  1834-7  a teacher  at  the  Conservatoire  and  later  a virtuoso 
and  composer;  Henry  Charles  Litolff  (d.  1891),  from  1851  the  well-known 
publisher  ; Wilhelm  Kruger  (d.  1883),  who,  driven  from  Paris  by  the  war  of 
1870,  was  then  court-pianist  at  Stuttgart;  Charles  Samuel  Bovy  [‘Lysberg’] 
(d.  1873),  long  a teacher  at  the  Geneva  conservatory ; Georges  Mathias,  from 
1862  on  the  Conservatoire  staff;  Jacob  Blumenthal,  from  1848  pianist  to 
Queen  Victoria;  the  Belgian  D6sir6  Magnus  (d.  1884);  Auguste  Dupont 
(d.  1890),  from  1852  in  the  Brussels  conservatory;  the  popular  American 
Louis  Moreau  Gottschalk  (d.  1869)  ; Joseph  Ascher  (d.  1869),  pianist  to  the 
Empress  Eugdnie ; Renaud  de  Vilbac  (d.  1884),  from  1856  organist  at  one  of 
the  Paris  churches;  Martin  Lazare  (d.  1897),  who,  after  wide  tours,  worked 
at  Brussels;  Charles  Delioux,  prominent  from  about  1850  ; EugSne  Ketterer 
(d.  1870);  Damaso  Zabalza  y Olaso  (d.  1894),  from  1858  at  Madrid,  later 
professor  of  theory  at  the  conservatory ; and  Louis  Gobbaerts  of  Brussels 
(d.  1886). 


SALON  MUSIC 


535 


With  Vienna  may  be  associated  many  minor  Bohemians  and  Hungarians, 
as  well  as  a few  others.  To  this  general  group  belong  Karl  Maria  yon  Booklet 
(d.  1881),  from  about  1830  a successful  teacher;  Joseph  Fischhof  (d.  1857), 
from  1833  in  the  conservatory ; Leopold  yon  Meyer  (d.  1883),  a rather  eccen- 
tric player  who  toured  extensively ; Ignaz  Amadeus  Tedesco  (d.  1882),  a 
Bohemian,  best  known  in  Russia,  chiefly  at  Odessa ; the  Bavarian  Rudolf 
Schachner  (d.  1896)  ; Imre  SzSkely  (d.  1887),  noted  for  his  Hungarian  fan- 
tasias, from  1852  living  at  Pesth;  Albert  Jungmann  (d.  1892),  who,  after 
teaching  at  Rome,  was  from  1853  a publisher  at  Vienna ; Julius  Schulhoff 
(d.  1898),  a Bohemian  whom  Chopin  befriended  at  Paris,  and  who,  after 
tours,  was  popular  there  as  a teacher,  removing  in  1870  to  Dresden,  where 
also  he  was  honored;  Vincent  Adler  (d.  1871),  a Hungarian,  long  at  Paris 
and  from  1865  in  the  Geneva  conservatory;  the  refined  player  and  composer 
Alfred  Jaell  (d.  1882),  from  1843  almost  constantly  on  tours  throughout 
Europe  ; Joseph  Low  (d.  1886),  a prolific  composer  at  Prague.  Here  may  be 
added  the  Russian  Alexander  Villoing  (d.  1878),  the  teacher  at  Moscow  of  the 
Rubinstein  brothers. 

In  passing,  a few  Italian  pianists  may  be  mentioned,  such  as  Theodor 
Dohler  (d.  1856),  who  began  at  Naples,  was  long  in  court-service  at  Lucca 
and  lived  finally  at  Florence,  besides  touring  throughout  Europe ; Stefano 
Golinelli  (d.  1891),  for  many  years  (till  1870)  active  at  Bologna,  part  of  his 
many  works  being  in  large  forms  ; and  the  four  brothers  Fumagalli,  all  more 
or  less  associated  with  Milan. 

In  Germany,  even  more  than  in  France,  the  impulse  to  supply 
salon  music  blended  with  pedagogical  efforts,  it  being  clearly 
seen  that  through  the  use  of  entertaining  pieces  of  graded 
difficulty  the  young  student  might  be  introduced  to  the  art  of 
piano-playing  and  thus  to  some  acquaintance  with  musical  art 
in  general.  Although  it  is  true  that  the  emphasis  upon  piano 
music  has  thus  been  sometimes  made  so  exclusive  as  to  engender 
the  notion  that  it  is  central  or  supreme,  yet  such  cases  merely 
illustrate  how  efforts  that  are  not  essentially  harmful  may  be 
misused. 

Without  attempting  to  distinguish  between  the  mere  writer  of  salon  pieces, 
the  virtuoso  of  second  or  third  rank  and  the  pedagogue  who  uses  popular 
styles,  the  following  names  are  given  as  illustrating  the  immense  expansion  of 
piano  study  and  practice  in  Germany  : — Jakob  Schmitt  (d.  1853),  an  excellent 
teacher  at  Hamburg,  with  many  didactic  pieces  ; the  Bohemian  Franz  Xaver 
Chwatal  of  Magdeburg  (d.  1879)  5 Louis  Kufferath  (d.  1882),  in  1836-50  direc- 
tor of  the  Leeuwarden  conservatory ; Charles  Voss  (d.  1882),  from  1848  well 
known  in  Paris,  writing  also  some  striking  concertos  ; Fritz  Spindler  (d.  1905), 
the  celebrated  Dresden  teacher,  whose  works  likewise  extend  to  large  forms, 
including  3 symphonies;  Theodor  Kullak  (d.  1882),  the  still  more  celebrated 
teacher  at  Berlin,  where  in  1850  he  founded  a famous  Akademie ; Albert 


536 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


Loschhorn  (d.  1905),  another  strong  Berlin  teacher,  with  varied  works  in  a 
fine  style;  Louis  Kohler  (d.  1886),  who,  after  a short  operatic  career,  from 
1847  was  so  prominent  a piano-teacher  at  Konigsberg  that  he  was  called  a 
second  Czerny;  the  able  general  composer  Raff  (d.  1882),  whose  reputation 
was  first  made  as  a piano  composer  and  who  produced  much  in  the  salon  style, 
besides  greater  things  (see  sec.  210)  ; Siegmund  Lebert  (d.  1884),  best  known 
as  the  promoter  in  1856-7  of  the  Stuttgart  conservatory ; Johann  Vogt  (d. 
1888),  successively  teacher  at  St.  Petersburg,  Dresden  and  Berlin;  Karl 
Wehle  (d.  1883),  a Bohemian,  trained  at  Leipsic  and  Berlin,  who  toured  the 
world  and  then  settled  at  Paris  ; the  Dane  August  Winding  (d.  1899),  later 
head  of  the  Copenhagen  conservatory;  Wilhelm  Speidel  (d.  1899),  in  1848- 
54  at  Munich  and  from  1857  associated  with  Lebert  at  Stuttgart,  a composer 
for  chorus  and  orchestra  as  well  as  piano ; Louis  Schottmann,  since  about  1855 
a prominent  Berlin  teacher ; the  Hamburg  conductor  and  teacher  Ludwig 
Deppe  (d.  1890)  ; Gustav  Lange  of  Berlin  (d.  1889)  ; Ludwig  Stark  (d. 
1884),  Lebert’s  strongest  coadjutor  at  Stuttgart  and  an  able  choral  composer; 
Karl  Kolling  of  Hamburg;  Friedrich  Damm  of  Dresden  ; Robert  Pflughaupt 
(d.  1871),  from  1862  at  Aix-la-Chapelle ; Franz  Bendel  (d.  1874),  a teacher 
with  Kullak  at  Berlin,  with  some  large  works ; Albert  Biehl,  noted  for  his 
advanced  technical  studies  ; Alexander  Dorn  (d.  1901),  son  and  pupil  of  Hein- 
rich Dorn,  who  worked  in  1855-65  in  Egypt  and  from  1868  at  the  Berlin 
Hochschule;  Dionys  Pruckner  (d.  1896),  from  1859  a distinguished  member 
of  the  Stuttgart  circle ; Alexander  Winterberger,  successively  at  Vienna,  St. 
Petersburg  and  Leipsic;  the  Russian  Nicolai  von  Wilm,  in  1858-75  a leading 
teacher  and  composer  at  St.  Petersburg ; Heinrich  Doring,  since  1 858  prominent 
at  Dresden,  writing  not  only  good  piano-studies,  but  male  choruses,  chamber 
suites  and  sacred  music;  Anton  Krause  (d.  1907),  in  1859-97  conductor  and 
excellent  teacher  at  Barmen  ; the  Bohemian  Hans  Schmitt,  since  1862  a suc- 
cessful teacher  in  the  Vienna  conservatory  ; Friedrich  Baumfelder  of  Dresden  ; 
Emil  Breslaur  of  Berlin,  not  only  a specialist  in  piano-teaching,  but  a leading 
spirit  in  the  organization  of  piano-teachers  into  societies ; Anton  Deprosse 
(d.  1878),  who  lived  chiefly  at  Munich  ; Isidor  Seiss,  since  1871  a teacher  in 
the  Cologne  conservatory;  Louis  Brassin  (d.  1884),  teacher  at  Berlin  and 
St.  Petersburg ; and  scores  of  others. 

To  this  list  might  also  be  added  the  names  of  many  composers  whose  emi- 
nence was  chiefly  won  in  other  fields. 

200.  The  Bravura  Pianists.  — The  increasing  valuation  of  the 
piano  and  its  music  was  further  evidenced  about  1825  by  the 
advent  of  many  virtuosi  who  were  more  notable  as  technical 
experts  than  as  musicians  in  the  large  sense.  As  a rule,  they 
sought  to  feed  the  popular  appetite  for  sensation,  though  not 
without  some  degree  of  artistic  skill  in  method.  Under  their  in- 
fluence the  resources  of  pianistic  dexterity  were  developed  to  the 
utmost,  the  public  interest  in  piano  music  stimulated,  and  to  some 
extent  the  literature  of  the  instrument  enriched.  To  this  class 


THE  BRAVURA  PIANISTS 


537 


Liszt  himself  undoubtedly  belonged  and  in  it  he  became  a 
prince.  But  in  his  case  the  basis  of  general  musicianship  was 
broader  and  deeper  than  in  that  of  his  contemporaries  Herz 
and  Thalberg.  As  time  went  on,  the  separation  between  the 
more  mechanical  and  the  more  artistic  groups  became  wider  — 
the  one  contenting  itself  with  showy  effects  such  as  the  per- 
fected piano  made  peculiarly  possible,  the  other  seeking  to  use 
the  piano  as  a medium  for  important  musical  expression,  and 
yet  keeping  in  touch  with  other  fields  of  creation  and  perform- 
ance. In  the  end,  of  course,  the  second  group  drove  the  first 
out  of  the  larger  musical  centres ; but  for  two  or  three  decades 
the  spectacular  school  was  in  high  favor  and  renown. 

It  should  be  noted  that  there  is  no  real  dividing-line  between 
salon  music  and  concert  music  of  the  bravura  order.  The  latter 
is  cast  often  in  larger  forms  and  necessarily  abounds  in  technical 
difficulties,  but  the  difference  is  more  one  of  degree  than  of  kind. 
And  much  of  the  success  of  virtuosi  was  secured  by  their 
specially  effective  renderings  of  small  pieces  that  were  entirely 
suitable  for  salon  use.  Among  the  compositions  of  the  bravura 
artists  there  was  usually  a marked  absence  of  elaborate  forms 
like  the  sonata  and  the  concerto. 

Henri  Herz  (d.  1888),  born  at  Vienna  in  1806,  studied  first  with  his  father 
and  with  Hiinten  at  Coblentz,  but  at  10  was  taken  to  Paris,  soon  winning  suc- 
cess at  the  Conservatoire.  In  1821  he  derived  benefit  from  observing  Mo- 
scheles.  His  playing  and  his  brilliant,  but  shallow  compositions  became  the 
fashion,  and  he  was  much  sought  as  a teacher.  In  1831  he  toured  Germany 
with  the  violinist  Lafont,  and  in  1833  appeared  at  London  with  Moscheles  and 
Cramer.  From  1842  he  was  professor  at  the  Conservatoire,  but  also  entered 
upon  a piano-making  enterprise  w'hich  was  so  unfortunate  that  in  1845-51  he 
made  a comprehensive  American  tour  to  recoup  himself.  He  then  started  a 
piano-factory  of  his  own,  this  time  with  striking  success.  In  1874  he  gave  up 
his  professorship.  His  200  works  include  8 concertos,  some  sonatas  and 
rondos,  a large  number  of  variations  on  operatic  airs,  etc.  Of  them  only  his 
etudes  and  his  method  are  now  much  regarded.  His  letters  from  America 
were  collected  and  published  (1866). 

Sigismund  Thalberg  (d.  1871),  born  at  Geneva  in  1812,  was  brought  up  at 
Vienna,  studying  with  Sechter,  Hummel  and  the  bassoonist  Mittag,  though 
originally  destined  for  a diplomatic  career.  At  14  he  was  privately  famous,  at 
17  (1829)  played  in  public  and  published  some  works,  and  in  1830  toured  in 
southern  Germany  with  success.  From  1834  he  was  court-pianist,  but  from 
1835  for  over  20  years  lived  mostly  at  Paris,  though  writh  many  long  tours 
through  northern  Europe  and  to  America.  After  1858  his  home  was  at 
Posilippo  (near  Naples),  where  he  died.  He  had  somewhat  unusual  hands 


538 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


and  was  an  indefatigable  technical  student,  so  that  he  was  unsurpassed  in  the 
execution  of  both  cantabileand  bravura  passages.  He  was  a better  artist  than 
Herz,  but  won  his  popularity,  not  by  a broad  interpretation  of  masterpieces  or 
by  serious  creation  of  his  own,  but  by  the  faultless  treatment  of  salon  music  on 
a concert  scale.  His  published  works  include  showy  fantasias  and  transcrip- 
tions, nocturnes,  caprices,  dances,  a concerto,  a sonata,  etc.,  and  he  also  pro- 
duced 2 unsuccessful  operas  (1851-5). 

Marie  F61icit6  Denise  (Moke)  Pleyel  (d.  1875),  pupil  of  Herz,  Moscheles 
and  Kalkbrenner,  may  be  named  here,  though  she  was  more  than  a bravura 
player,  winning  praise  from  critics  as  diverse  as  Mendelssohn,  Liszt,  and 
Auber,  and  ranking  with  the  best  virtuosi  of  the  period.  In  1848-72  she 
taught  with  distinction  at  the  Brussels  conservatory. 

Ernst  Haberbier  (d.  1869),  born  in  1813  at  Konigsberg,  had  great  success 
from  1832  at  St.  Petersburg,  becoming  court-pianist  in  1847.  For  years  after- 
ward he  toured  in  England,  Denmark,  Sweden,  northern  Germany  and  to 
Paris,  displaying  special  brilliance  in  rapid  passages  divided  between  the 
hands.  His  last  years  were  spent  as  a teacher  at  Bergen.  He  left  some  effec- 
tive concert-pieces. 

Jakob  Rosenhain  (d.  1894),  born  in  1813  and  trained  at  Mannheim  and 
Frankfort,  was  from  1825  a prominent  touring  virtuoso,  from  1849  making  his 
home  at  Paris,  where  he  was  intimate  with  Cramer,  and  later  at  Baden-Baden. 
He  was  an  ambitious  and  enterprising  composer,  writing  not  only  substantial 
concert-pieces,  dtudes,  etc.,  for  the  piano,  but  a piano-concerto,  chamber  music, 
3 symphonies  and  4 operas  (1834-63). 

Emile  Prudent  (d.1863),  born  in  1817,  stepped  into  prominence  in  1833  and 
was  counted  in  the  same  class  with  Thalberg,  like  whom  he  toured  abundantly 
and  had  a large  following  as  a teacher.  His  composition  lay  chiefly  in  the 
same  field,  but  evinced  more  sentiment.  He  might  have  advanced  to  higher 
work  had  not  his  career  been  cut  short. 

Alexander  Dreyschock  (d.  1869),  a Bohemian,  born  in  1818,  was  a preco- 
cious player,  soundly  trained  at  Prague  by  Tomaschek.  From  1838  for  about 
20  years  he  was  constantly  occupied  with  tours.  In  1862  he  was  called  by 
Rubinstein  to  the  new  St.  Petersburg  conservatory,  being  also  director  of  the 
operatic  school  and  court-pianist;  but  failing  health  occasioned  his  retire- 
ment in  1868.  He  excelled  in  difficult  feats  with  octaves,  sixths  and  thirds, 
and  for  the  left  hand  alone.  He  chose  mostly  to  play  his  own  pieces,  but 
undertook  some  wider  interpretation,  though  without  sympathy.  His  writing 
was  in  the  usual  display-forms,  with  a few  concerted  works  and  an  opera. 

Heinrich  Rudolf  Willmers  (d.  1878,  insane),  born  at  Berlin  in  1821,  after 
touring  in  1838-53,  lived  at  Vienna  except  during  1864-6,  when  he  taught  at 
the  Stern  conservatory  at  Berlin.  He  was  famous  for  his  execution  of  trills, 
especially  in  complicated  ‘ chains,’  and  of  staccato  passages. 

Joseph  Wieniawski,  the  brother  of  the  eminent  Polish  violinist,  was  trained 
first  at  Paris  and  later  by  Liszt  at  Weimar.  After  a few  years  at  Paris,  from 
1866  he  taught  in  the  conservatories  of  St.  Petersburg,  Warsaw  and  Brussels, 
besides  touring  freely.  His  works  include  many  Etudes  and  dances,  with 
several  orchestral  compositions. 


THE  BRAVURA  PIANISTS 


539 


Somewhat  apart  from  the  rest  of  this  group  stands  Adolf  Henselt  (d.  1889), 
born  in  Bavaria  in  1814,  who  was  first  trained  at  Munich  by  Frau  von  Fladt, 
but  studied  also  with  Hummel  at  Weimar  and  Sechter  at  Vienna.  He  be- 
came known  as  a phenomenal  player  in  1837,  and  from  1838  was  in  court 
service  at  St.  Petersburg  and  in  high  repute  as  virtuoso,  teacher  and  com- 
poser. He  seldom  traveled,  and  for  50  years  was  famous  only  by  report  out- 
side of  Russia.  He  gave  excessive  attention  to  abnormal  stretches  in  legato, 
for  which  he  devised  peculiar  studies.  Although  he  adhered  generally  to  the 
old-fashioned  securing  of  tone  by  finger-action  only,  his  style  was  much  more 
emotional  and  poetic  than  others  of  his  group,  and  also  approached  the  mas- 
siveness of  Liszt.  He  is  best  known  by  a concerto,  many  fine  dtudes  and 
some  beautiful  short  works. 

Among  noted  women  pianists  were  Louise  (Dumont)  Farrenc  (d.  1875), 
from  1821  the  wife  of  the  flutist  and  historical  student  J.  H.  A.  Farrenc  and 
from  1842  professor  at  the  Paris  Conservatoire,  producing  a great  variety  of 
orchestral,  chamber  and  piano  music;  Luise  (David)  Dulcken  (d.  1850), 
sister  of  the  great  violinist  and  wife  of  F.  Q.  Dulcken,  who  from  1828  became 
conspicuous  at  London,  being  the  teacher  of  Queen  Victoria ; Marie  LSopoldine 
Blahetka  (d.  1887),  a member  of  the  Viennese  group,  who  from  1840  lived  at 
Boulogne  ; and  Louise  Japha  (Langhans),  a pupil  of  the  Schumanns  at  Diis- 
seldorf,  who,  after  concertizing  with  her  husband,  was  from  1863  prominent  at 
Paris  and  from  1874  at  Wiesbaden.  The  last  two  were  gifted  in  composition. 

201.  Liszt  and  the  Orchestral  Style.  — Side  by  side  with 
Chopin’s  comparatively  short  and  pathetic  career  ran  the  first  half 
of  Liszt’s  long  and  showy  one.  Like  Chopin,  he  brought  into 
music  a decidedly  new  national  flavor,  also  eastern,  but  from  un- 
tamed Hungary  instead  of  humiliated  Poland.  Like  him,  he 
developed  precociously  into  a masterly  virtuoso  and  early  sought 
Paris  as  headquarters.  But,  unlike  him,  he  stood  forth,  even 
in  youth,  as  a consummate  swayer  of  audiences  and  master  of 
men,  as  an  interpreter  of  the  whole  range  of  piano  literature, 
and  ultimately  as  a versatile  composer  and  an  imperial  force 
in  musical  progress.  Before  1850  his  work  was  closely  linked 
with  Chopin’s,  but  later  was  still  more  intimately  interwoven 
with  Wagner’s.  His  eminence  is  partly  due  to  his  readiness 
to  appreciate  great  art  wherever  found  and  to  throw  himself 
generously  into  its  furtherance.  His  power  of  absolute  crea- 
tion and  the  message  that  he  brought  were  not  so  significant  as 
his  breadth  of  sympathy  and  his  power  of  leadership.  As  a 
player  he  speedily  reached  a place  of  incontestable  supremacy, 
and  then  as  a teacher  he  stamped  a deep  impression  upon  the 
whole  texture  of  musical  thought. 


540 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


Liszt,  when  a boy,  came  into  the  Vienna  atmosphere,  with  its 
strong  interest  in  instrumental  styles  of  composition.  Bee- 
thoven was  at  the  acme  of  his  power,  and  the  city  had  long 
been  the  home  of  leading  players,  both  pianists  and  others. 
Ensemble  music  was  everywhere  exalted.  To  these  stimuli  his 
ardent  spirit  responded,  so  that  later,  when  he  became  known 
as  a virtuoso  throughout  northern  Europe,  his  style  tended  more 
and  more  toward  fullness  of  color  and  splendor  of  effect  such 
as  the  orchestra  has,  but  which  had  been  attempted  upon  the 
piano  only  rarely.  Liszt’s  technical  accomplishments  were  so 
extraordinary  that  he  promptly  expanded  the  range  of  pianism 
in  several  directions,  almost  stepping  beyond  the  verge  of  what 
is  germane  to  it,  at  least  establishing  a new  standard  of  dexter- 
ity and  eloquence  for  it.  Happily,  hand  in  hand  with  this 
capacity  for  dazzling  mechanism  went  a fine  culture  of  mind 
which  opened  to  his  sympathetic  use  the  whole  range  of  key- 
board music  from  Bach  to  Chopin,  and  from  the  daintiest  ba- 
gatelle to  the  most  massive  concerto. 

Liszt’s  service  to  piano  music  went  much  beyond  the  enrich- 
ment of  technique.  It  included  manifold  illustrations  of  how 
the  piano  can  reproduce  by  suggestion  the  effect  of  much  that 
was  not  originally  written  for  it  or  conceived  from  its  point  of 
view.  ‘ Arrangements  * of  vocal,  organ  and  orchestral  works 
had  not  been  unknown,  of  course,  but  in  Liszt’s  hands  they  took 
on  a new  importance,  since  in  him  was  united  consummate  com- 
mand of  the  instrument  and  profound  sympathy  with  the  aim 
and  structure  of  concerted  composition.  In  his  own  playing  of 
the  piano  works  of  others  he  knew  how  not  only  to  render  them 
in  accordance  with  the  conventions  of  the  period  or  school  to 
which  they  belonged,  but  also,  while  preserving  their  individual- 
ity, to  clothe  them  with  something  of  the  freshness  and  breadth 
of  modern  orchestral  style.  And  in  his  many  ‘ transcriptions  * 
he  did  the  same  thing  with  freedom  and  authority. 

Liszt  was  also  notable  as  one  of  the  first  to  make  a deliberate 
and  powerful  use  of  ‘ program  music’ — music  in  which  the  imagi- 
nation is  directed  in  advance  by  some  literary  motto  or  plan  in 
accordance  with  which  the  development  proceeds.  The  legiti- 
macy of  this  method  has  been  somewhat  hotly  debated  (see  sec. 
21 1).  Doubtless  much  depends  on  the  degree  of  emphasis  upon 
it,  on  the  particular  series  of  ideas  or  sentiments  chosen,  and  espe- 


LISZT  AS  A PIANIST 


541 


daily  on  the  creative  originality  displayed.  Liszt’s  own  efforts 
in  this  field  — which  were  not  confined  to  his  earlier  period  or 
to  his  piano  works  — often  have  a vigor  and  beauty  hard  to 
deny.  Hence  here  again  he  effected  a considerable  expansion 
of  the  range  of  artistic  style  (see  sec.  210). 

Franz  Liszt  (d.  1886)  was  born  in  1811  at  Raiding,  a small  town  in  west- 
ern Hungary  (35  m.  southeast  of  Vienna).  His  father  was  employed  as 
manager  on  one  of  the  Esterhazy  estates  — a musical  amateur  who  played  the 
piano  and  other  instruments.  At  9 the  son  was  so  far  advanced  that  his 
playing  before  a company  of  noblemen  led  them  to  proffer  an  annual  scholar- 
ship of  about  $1000  for  six  years  to  ensure  his  education.  This  the  father 
accepted,  gave  up  his  position  and  took  the  boy  at  once  to  Vienna.  There 
he  studied  under  Czerny,  Salieri  and  Randhartinger  with  such  rapid  growth 
that  when,  at  the  opening  of  1823,  he  appeared  in  public  his  playing  made  a 
sensation,  moving  even  Beethoven  to  an  unusual  display  of  emotion.  He  was 
now  taken  to  Paris,  but  as  a foreigner  was  declined  at  the  Conservatoire  by 
Cherubini,  and  began  private  study  under  Reicha  and  Paer.  His  ambition  at 
first  lay  in  the  field  of  opera,  and  in  1825  his  operetta  Don  Sanche  was  suc- 
cessfully produced.  He  also  made  some  tours  as  a pianist  in  England  and 
Switzerland. 

His  annual  stipend  ceased  in  1826  and  his  father  died  the  next  year.  This 
forced  him  to  choose  a pianistic  career,  teaching  and  touring.  He  had  the 
entree  into  society  through  high-born  Hungarian  friends,  and  he  came  to 
know  the  foremost  literary  and  musical  lights  of  Paris,  including  Victor  Hugo, 
Lamartine,  ‘George  Sand,1  Paganini,  Berlioz  and  Chopin.  For  a time  he  was 
much  interested  in  the  socialistic  program  of  Saint-Simon,  and  was  deeply 
stirred  by  the  excitement  of  the  Revolution  of  1830.  Already  he  showed  the 
peculiar  mixture  of  aristocratic  tastes  with  revolutionary  propensities  which 
marked  him  later.  In  1834  began  his  connection  with  the  Countess  d’Agoult, 
known  in  literature  as  ‘ Daniel  Stern,1  with  whom  he  lived  about  ten  years, 
mostly  at  Geneva,  and  by  whom  he  had  three  children.  In  1835  Thalberg 
appeared  in  Paris,  and  in  1836  he  and  Liszt  contested  for  supremacy,  the 
latter  being  plainly  the  stronger. 

From  1839  Liszt’s  time  was  largely  occupied  by  far-reaching  concert-tours 
throughout  Europe.  Everywhere  his  amazing  technique,  his  masterly  inter- 
pretations and  improvisations,  and  his  unique  magnetism  placed  him  at  the 
head  of  the  increasing  circle  of  pianists.  His  ambition,  to  be  the  Paganini  of 
the  piano,  was  fully  realized,  and  his  pecuniary  profits  were  so  large  that  his 
independence  was  secure.  In  this  connection  came  out  his  fine  generosity. 
In  1837  he  sent  a large  gift  for  the  sufferers  by  an  inundation  at  Pesth,  in 
1839  established  a fund  for  the  poor  in  his  native  town,  and  in  1839,  also, 
when  the  subscriptions  to  the  proposed  Beethoven  monument  at  Bonn  lagged, 
made  up  the  needed  balance  of  about  $10,000.  These  are  but  instances  of  a 
life-long  habit.  After  1847  it  is  said  that  he  gave  no  concerts  for  his  own  benefit. 

As  early  as  1842  he  had  become  a favorite  at  Weimar,  where  he  appeared 
year  after  year.  In  1849  he  became  court-choirmaster,  a position  that  he 


542 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


made  illustrious  for  several  years,  there  beginning  the  second  division  of 
his  life  (see  sec.  210). 

Liszt's  piano  works  — only  partly  belonging  to  the  period  before  1850  — 
include  ( a ) a long  list  of  transcriptions  and  arrangements  from  the  most  varied 
sources,  as  from  Bach’s  organ-fugues,  Beethoven’s  symphonies,  overtures  and 
other  orchestral  works  by  Weber,  Mendelssohn,  Meyerbeer,  Rossini,  Berlioz, 
Wagner,  Raff,  Glinka,  etc.,  vocal  works  by  Arcadelt,  Mozart,  Beethoven, 
Schubert  and  innumerable  opera-writers  ; ( b ) 14  Rhapsodies  on  Hungarian 

themes,  besides  many  other  national  works ; (c)  a quantity  of  original  works, 

from  brief  and  often  very  beautiful  characteristic  pieces  up  to  extended  con- 
cert-fantasias, etudes  of  extreme  difficulty,  2 concertos  and  several  other 
works  with  orchestra. 

As  a composer,  Liszt  seldom  showed  creative  power  of  a high 
order,  except  in  smaller  lyric  forms,  and  many  of  his  themes 
are  pretentious,  but  hollow.  He  was  thoroughly  impatient 
of  the  limits  and  regularities  of  accepted  form  and  style,  and 
struck  off  into  vagaries  of  structure  that  seemed  to  his  contem- 
poraries lawless.  But  he  had  gifts  of  sensational  effect,  of 
grandiose  sentiment,  of  coruscating  decoration,  and,  while  these 
hardly  constituted  him  a constructive  artist  of  the  first  rank,  his 
application  of  them  certainly  broadened  the  scope  of  composi- 
tion and  prepared  the  way  for  other  composers  of  the  most 
modern  type.  His  affiliation  with  Berlioz  in  this  regard  was 
notable,  and  he  may  even  be  likened  somewhat  to  Schumann, 
though  much  inferior  to  him  in  positive  imagination. 

202.  Rubinstein  and  Bulow.  — Liszt  gave  a powerful  impetus 
to  interpretation  as  one  of  the  functions  of  concert  pianism. 
In  this  field  were  later  conspicuous  two  other  great  players, 
whose  careers  were  exactly  parallel  in  years,  but  who  were 
temperamentally  and  otherwise  widely  contrasted.  One  of 
them,  Rubinstein,  was  not  only  a supereminent  pianist,  but  an 
ambitious  and  abundant  composer  in  the  largest  concerted 
forms,  besides  being  the  effective  link  in  advanced  musical 
culture  between  Germany  and  Russia  — in  one  sense  the  pro- 
genitor of  the  modern  Russian  school.  The  other,  Billow,  was 
likewise  not  only  a pianist  of  the  highest  rank,  but  a most 
thorough  and  masterly  orchestral  and  operatic  conductor,  a 
critical  editor  of  musical  scores,  and  one  of  the  early  promoters 
of  Wagner’s  ideas.  Both  utilized  their  hold  upon  the  public  to 
restore  to  attention  the  whole  range  of  keyboard  composition, 


RUBINSTEIN  AND  BULOW 


543 


often  through  carefully  planned  series  of  historical  programs  — 
Rubinstein,  with  his  Slavic  warmth,  having  on  the  whole  the 
greater  sympathy  with  romantic  tendencies,  while  Biilow,  with 
his  acute  intellectuality,  inclined  to  magnify  classical  precision, 
symmetry  and  structural  energy. 

It  is  curious  that  Rubinstein,  probably  because  disappointed  in  his  own 
operatic  ambitions,  was  unable  to  appreciate  the  rich  promise  of  the 
Wagnerian  movement  into  which  the  cooler  Bulow  threw  his  splendid 
energy  with  enthusiasm. 

Both  artists  were  more  or  less  associated  with  Liszt,  Biilow 
being  his  pupil  and  intimate  friend.  Both,  like  him,  became 
everywhere  known  by  means  of  prodigious  concert-tours,  ex- 
tending in  their  cases  to  America  as  well  as  Europe.  Thus,  and 
as  teachers,  both  were  profoundly  influential  in  molding  popular 
taste  upon  larger  lines  than  the  bravura  players  had  followed. 
Rubinstein  naturally  exerted  special  power  in  his  native  Russia, 
though  his  sympathies  allied  him  closely  with  Germany  as  well, 
while  Biilow  was  most  active  at  Berlin,  Munich,  Meiningen, 
Frankfort  and  other  German  centres.  On  the  side  of  execution, 
Rubinstein  resembled  Liszt  in  his  liking  for  intense  sensuous 
beauties  and  for  grandiose  orchestral  effects,  while  Biilow, 
though  not  lacking  in  impetuosity  and  abandon,  was  far 
more  of  a precisian,  polishing  his  performances  to  an  extreme 
of  nicety.  Both  had  marvelous  memories,  but  Biilow’s  mind  re- 
tained even  the  most  elaborate  orchestral  scores. 

Anton  Rubinstein  (d.  1894)  was  born  in  1830  in  Bessarabia  (SW.  Russia),  but 
was  brought  up  at  Moscow,  where  his  father  was  a maker  of  pencils.  His  par- 
ents were  of  Jewish  stock,  though  nominally  members  of  the  Orthodox  Greek 
Church.  His  mother  was  cultivated  and  a good  pianist,  being  his  first  teacher. 
At  7 began  lessons  with  Villoing,  who  in  1839-40  took  him  to  Paris.  Here  he 
won  notice  from  Chopin  and  Liszt,  but  was  declined  admission  to  the  Conserva- 
toire. Before  returning  home  he  toured  as  a youthful  prodigy.  At  14  (1844) 
he  and  his  brother  were  taken  to  Berlin,  Anton  studying  under  Dehn  and  in 
1846-8,  his  father  having  died,  touring  in  Austria.  From  1848  he  was  at  St. 
Petersburg,  a favorite  with  the  Grand  Duchess  Helen  and  beginning  to  write 
operas.  He  had  long  been  composing  freely,  and  in  1854-8  made  a grand 
tour  in  Germany,  France  and  England  to  bring  his  works  to  public  notice. 
His  success  was  followed  in  1858  by  his  appointment  as  court-musician  to  the 
Czar  and  in  1859  as  leader  of  the  Musical  Society.  In  1862  he  started  the  con- 
servatory and  was  its  director  till  1867  (again  in  1887-90).  In  1867-70  came 
his  most  brilliant  tour  in  Europe,  followed  in  1872-3  by  another  in  America. 


544 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


Meanwhile  he  was  assiduously  adding  to  his  compositions,  especially  in  the 
dramatic  field.  His  last  years  were  spent  mostly  in  Berlin  and  Dresden,  where 
he  continued  to  give  important  recitals.  The  success  of  Wagner  embittered 
him,  so  that  he  professed  despair  about  the  whole  future  of  music.  With  the 
so-called  ‘ neo-Russian 1 school  he  had  little  sympathy,  though  for  it  he  had 
laid  foundations. 

His  works  for  the  piano  include  5 concertos,  fantasias  with  orchestra,  4 
sonatas,  a suite,  preludes,  Etudes,  barcarolles,  tone-pictures  and  many  salon- 
pieces,  besides  works  for  four  hands  or  two  pianos.  The  same  qualities  appear 
in  them  as  in  his  larger  works  (see  secs.  205,  214) — considerable  melodic 
richness,  fluent  and  often  grandiose  plans,  a striving  after  extreme  distinction, 
and  yet  a lack  of  inspiration,  compacted  structure  and  sustained  power.  As 
an  author,  he  is  known  from  Memoirs  (1889)  and  sarcastic  critiques  (1892-7). 

His  brother  Nicolai  Rubinstein  (d.  1881),  five  years  younger,  was  in  1844-6 
his  fellow-student  at  Berlin,  thence  returning  to  Moscow.  There  in  1859  he 
founded  the  Musical  Society  and  in  1854  the  conservatory,  of  which  he  was 
the  head  almost  20  years,  besides  giving  concerts  regularly  at  St.  Petersburg. 
He,  too,  was  a remarkable  player,  an  able  conductor  and  an  excellent  com- 
poser of  salon  and  concert  music. 

With  Anton  Rubinstein  at  St.  Petersburg  was  associated  from  1852  the 
talented  Austrian  Theodor  Leschetizki,  who  had  been  trained  by  Czerny  and 
Sechter,  and  had  begun  concert-giving  at  12  (1842).  After  more  than  25 
years  there  as  teacher,  conductor  and  composer,  from  1878  he  toured  exten- 
sively and  in  1880,  marrying  his  pupil  Annette  Essipoff,  established  himself  at 
Vienna,  becoming  one  of  the  best-known  of  teachers.  His  works  include 
many  striking  concert-pieces  and  an  opera  (1867). 

Hans  von  Biilow  (d.  1894),  born  at  Dresden  in  1830,  was  first  trained  there 
by  Wieck  and  Eberwein.  In  1848-9,  while  beginning  law-study  at  Leipsic  and 
Berlin,  he  kept  up  his  musical  work,  finally  choosing  it  for  his  career.  Amid 
the  revolutionary  ferment  of  the  times  he  became  so  much  interested  in  Wag- 
ner that  in  1850-1  he  followed  him  to  Zurich,  receiving  from  him  a strong  im- 
pulse to  orchestral  conducting.  After  brief  service  as  conductor  in  Switzerland 
and  study  with  Liszt  at  Weimar,  in  1853-5  he  gradually  won  his  way  as  a 
virtuoso,  in  1857  succeeding  Kullak  as  teacher  in  the  Stern  conservatory  at 
Berlin  and  in  1858  becoming  court-pianist  there.  In  1857  he  married  Cosima 
Liszt,  from  whom  in  1869  he  was  divorced  (she  becoming  Wagner’s  wife  in 
1870).  From  1864,  at  Wagner’s  urgency,  he  was  court-pianist  at  Munich  and 
from  1867  royal  choirmaster  and  head  of  the  conservatory,  but  in  1869  re- 
moved to  Florence,  where  he  was  active  on  behalf  of  German  music.  Resum- 
ing tours  in  1872  and  visiting  America  in  1875-6,  in  1878-80  he  was  court- 
conductor  at  Hanover,  and  in  1880-5  in  a similar  position  at  Meiningen,  where 
he  developed  an  orchestra  of  extraordinary  brilliance.  In  1885-8,  after 
another  American  tour,  he  taught  much  at  Frankfort  and  Berlin,  besides  con- 
ducting concerts  at  St.  Petersburg.  From  1888  he  led  a successful  concert 
series  at  Hamburg  until  his  health  failed. 

In  his  case  the  educational  instinct  was  always  prominent.  From  1849  he 
wrote  many  articles  in  advocacy  of  Wagner  and  new  ideas.  At  Munich  he 
devoted  great  pains  to  the  production  of  Wagner’s  Tristan  and  Die  Meister - 


RUBINSTEIN  AND  BULOW 


545 


singer.  Wherever  he  went,  his  programs  showed  a desire  to  improve  popular 
knowledge  and  taste.  He  prepared  invaluable  critical  editions  of  Beethoven’s 
sonatas,  works  by  older  writers  like  Bach  and  Handel,  Cramer’s  dtudes,  etc. 
His  early  Brief e (collected  1895)  show  how  varied  and  active  were  his  mental 
interests.  Of  his  compositions  but  few  are  published  — fine  transcriptions 
from  Wagner  and  Berlioz,  some  concert-pieces  and  songs,  with  several  works 
for  orchestra. 

With  Bulow  may  be  grouped  his  coadjutor  Karl  Klindworth,  born  at  Han- 
over in  1830.  He  was  mostly  self-taught  until  1852,  when  he  secured  means 
for  a year’s  study  with  Liszt.  Rapidly  developed  into  a fine  player,  from  1854 
he  taught  in  London,  also  giving  or  conducting  some  concerts.  From  1868 
he  was  professor  at  the  Moscow  conservatory.  In  1882-93  he  worked  with 
Biilow  at  Berlin,  conducting  the  Wagner-Verein  and  the  Philharmonic,  found- 
ing and  directing  a school  for  pianists,  and  continuing  fine  work,  begun  at 
Moscow,  as  arranger  and  editor  of  Wagner's  Ring , Chopin’s  works  (1878), 
Beethoven’s  sonatas,  various  elaborate  orchestral  works,  etc.  He  himself 
wrote  notable  etudes,  a difficult  Polonaise-Fantasie,  etc. 

Other  distinguished  players  and  teachers,  doing  good  work  for  the  establish- 
ment of  a large  view  of  piano  literature,  were  the  Russian  Eduard  Mertke  (d. 
1895),  in  1853-9  a violinist  at  the  Gewandhaus  and  from  1869  piano-teacher 
at  the  Cologne  conservatory,  publishing  arrangements  of  works  by  Hummel, 
Weber  and  Mendelssohn,  an  edition  of  Chopin,  original  studies  and  a suite, 
besides  2 operas  and  2 cantatas  ; and  the  Austrian  Anton  Door,  a pupil  of 
Czerny  and  Sechter,  who,  after  traveling  as  a virtuoso,  from  1859  taught  at 
Moscow  and  since  1869  in  the  Vienna  conservatory,  making  a name  as  a 
superior  teacher  and  an  enterprising  editor  of  the  classics  and  introducer  of 
novelties. 

To  these  should  be  added  Karl  Tausig  (d.  1871),  born  at  Warsaw  in  1841, 
studying  there  with  his  father  and  from  1855  with  Liszt.  He  rose  at  once  to 
an  astonishing  mastery  of  technique  and  interpretation,  actually  outshining  his 
master  at  many  points.  At  17  (1858)  he  appeared  publicly  at  Berlin  under 
Biilow’s  auspices,  and  then  lived  first  at  Dresden  and  later  at  Berlin,  founding 
a school  for  advanced  pianists  and  giving  concerts  constantly  throughout 
Germany  and  Russia.  At  30  his  dazzling  career  was  cut  short.  He  left  some 
important  arrangements  and  transcriptions,  invaluable  studies,  etc. 

The  enormous  demand  for  pianos  led  to  constant  accessions  to  the  ranks 
of  piano-makers.  Among  the  businesses  founded  after  1830  may  be 
mentioned  those  of  Debain  at  Paris  (1834),  Brinsmead  at  London 
(1835),  Biber  at  Munich  (c.  1835),  Knabe  at  Baltimore  (1839),  Feurich  at 
Leipsic  (1851),  Bluthner  at  Leipsic  (1853),  Bechstein  at  Berlin  (1856) 
and  Kaps  at  Dresden  (1859). 


2 N 


CHAPTER  XXXIII 


THE  OPERA  ASIDE  FROM  WAGNER 

203.  Verdi  and  the  Italians.  — Throughout  the  middle  of  the 
century  native  opera  in  Italy  had  little  significant  to  offer  except 
the  striking  career  of  Verdi.  In  general,  her  fertile  opera-writ- 
ers were  quite  content  to  supply  what  the  annual  seasons  every- 
where demanded  in  the  old,  familiar  style,  aiming  simply  at 
luscious  or  humorous  vocal  effects  and  theatrically  thrilling  epi- 
sodes with  the  minimum  of  choral  or  orchestral  richness,  and 
without  thoughtful  dramatic  treatment  of  either  characters  or 
plot.  The  literary  quality  of  librettos  remained  neglected. 
Popular  impression  depended  upon  captivation  by  star-singers, 
and  was  liable  to  be  upset  by  trivial  and  unreasonable  causes. 
What  was  called  4 learning  * was  resented,  with  any  energetic 
deviation  from  traditions.  Italy  had  but  slight  knowledge  of 
the  splendid  movements  in  musical  art  elsewhere  in  progress. 
For  piano  salon  music  and  for  songs  there  was  a constant 
demand,  but  not  for  any  serious  form  of  orchestral  or  chamber 
music.  Church  music,  of  course,  was  indispensable,  but  it  was 
largely  controlled  by  operatic  standards,  and,  except  in  a few 
places,  had  lost  all  memory  of  the  old  polyphonic  ideality. 
Furthermore,  all  Italy  was  stirring  with  eagerness  for  release 
from  foreign  dominion,  especially  that  of  Austria,  and  was 
groping  toward  the  national  unity  that  has  now  come  to  pass. 

Into  this  situation  was  projected  before  1840  the  sturdy  figure 
of  the  young  Verdi,  a man  of  the  people,  Italian  to  the  core,  a 
dramatic  enthusiast  and  a great  melodist,  yet  a student,  suscep- 
tible to  suggestions  from  all  sources,  a real  master  of  the  voice 
and  ultimately  of  orchestration,  in  artistic  endeavor  endowed 
with  an  elastic  endurance  seldom  equaled.  His  long  life  made 
him  a link  between  the  age  of  Rossini  and  that  of  fully  devel- 
oped Wagnerism,  and  his  genius  was  so  resourceful  and  plastic 
that  in  his  works  is  illustrated  much  of  the  tremendous  transi- 
tion between  these  two  extremes.  He  not  only  brought  lustre 

546 


VERDI 


547 


to  the  departing  glory  of  the  old  Italian  opera,  but  clearly  led 
the  way  toward  the  new  era  of  to  day  in  which  fresh  creators 
are  finding  their  place. 

Giuseppe  Verdi  (d.  1901)  was  born  in  1813  (a  few  months  after  Wagner) 
near  Busseto  (Parma)  in  an  innkeeper’s  family.  At  7 his  musical  tendencies 
became  marked,  at  10  he  acted  as  village-organist,  at  12  had  lessons  from 
Provesi,  the  leader  of  the  musical  so- 
ciety at  Busseto,  at  16  was  enabled  by 
the  merchant  Barezzi  (later  his  father- 
in-law)  to  begin  serious  study  at  Milan, 
though  not  accepted  at  the  conserva- 
tory, and  at  20  succeeded  Provesi  at 
Busseto,  where  he  married.  He  was 
composing  in  various  forms,  especially 
church  music  and  piano-pieces.  In 
1838,  with  his  first  opera,  Oberto , com- 
plete, he  moved  to  Milan,  where  the 
work  was  given  at  La  Scala  with  such 
success  that  three  more  operas  were 
contracted  for  by  the  manager  Merelli. 

While  working  on  the  first  of  these,  the 
comic  Un  giorno  di  regno  (1840),  his 
wife  and  two  children  suddenly  died,  a 
bitter  bereavement  which,  with  the  fail- 
ure of  the  opera,  utterly  discouraged  him. 

Merelli,  however,  finally  induced  him  to  undertake  Nabucco  (1842)  and 
I Lombardi  (1843),  which  were  decided  successes.  The  second  had  so  strong 
a patriotic  flavor  that  the  Austrian  police  forced  a change  in  the  plot  of  the 
fine  Ernani  (1844,  Venice),  lest  it  should  provoke  an  insurrection.  These 
works  established  his  Italian  reputation,  and  were  followed  (till  1850)  by  10 
other  works  at  various  theatres.  All  were  written  in  the  prevalent  style, 
though  with  many  evidences  of  independent  force,  especially  in  Attila  (1846, 
Venice)  and  Luisa  Miller  (1849,  Naples).  During  this  period  he  spent  a 
brief  time  at  London  and  Paris,  producing  'one  work  in  each  city  and 
receiving  invaluable  impressions  from  other  styles. 

The  results  of  these  stimuli  came  out  in  Rigoletto  (1851,  Venice),  II 
trovatore  (1853,  Rome)  and  La  traviata  (1853,  Venice),  which  soon  brought 
him  international  fame.  To  these  succeeded  at  intervals  7-8  works  which  for 
sundry  reasons  did  not  win  great  applause,  except  Un  ballo  in  inaschera 
(1859,  Rome)  and  Don  Carlos  (1867,  Paris).  In  general,  they  continued  to 
exemplify  the  usual  Italian  type,  but  they  were  executed  by  one  who  had  at 
command  a limitless  fund  of  spirit,  technical  ingenuity,  and  sense  of  form 
and  color.  From  about  i860  there  were  signs  of  a new  desire  to  empha- 
size richness  of  instrumentation  and  weld  details  into  a powerful  unity  of  effect. 

Verdi’s  third  manner  is  often  called  an  imitation  of  Wagner,  but  it  was 
rather  the  organic  growth  in  an  Italian  artist  induced  by  the  study  of  a far 
richer  style  than  his  own.  Though  nearly  60  years  old,  Verdi  now  began  a 


548 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


final  series  far  overtopping  all  his  earlier  works,  including  Aida  (1871,  Cairo), 
Otello  (1887,  Milan)  and  Falstaff  (1893,  Milan) — the  last,  though  finished 
in  his  80th  year,  being  one  of  the  strong  works  of  to-day.  In  the  last  two  he 
had  the  benefit  of  fine  librettos  from  the  poet-composer  Arrigo  Boito , one  of 
the  brightest  lights  of  the  ‘neo-Italian1  group.  Verdi  also  made  a deep 
impression  by  his  Requiem  (1874)  in  honor  of  the  national  patriot  Mazzini. 

In  all,  his  operas  number  over  30,  most  of  them  serious.  Even  those 
which  were  not  counted  successful  contain  important  passages.  Besides 
operas  he  wrote  little. 

Personally,  his  was  a character  of  rugged  independence  and  noble  purpose. 
His  simplicity  of  life,  warm-heartedness,  generosity,  fervid  love  of  country, 
with  his  brilliant  genius,  made  him  the  idol  of  Italy.  And  he  held  the  esteem 
of  musicians  everywhere  by  his  versatile  industry  and  his  sincere  excellence. 

Of  the  opera-writers  already  mentioned  (secs.  175-176)  Rossini  produced 
nothing  after  1830;  but  there  were  still  active  Pacini  (d.  1867),  with  40 
operas  after  1840,  including  his  best,  Saffo  (1840,  Naples),  and  several  others, 
like  Medea  (1843,  Palermo)  and  La  Regina  di  Cipro  (1846,  Turin)  ; Doni- 
zetti (d.  1848),  with  all  his  best-known  works  between  1830  and  ’43;  and 
Mercadante  (d.  1870),  with  his  masterpiece,  II giuraniento  (1 837,  Milan),  and 
some  others  about  the  same  time. 

Others  who  had  already  appeared  before  1830  were  Pier  Antonio  Coppola 
(d.  1877),  from  1816  a mediocre  rival  of  Rossini,  who  made  a hit  with  IVina 
pazza  per  amore  (1835,  Rome),  followed  by  GVIllinesi  (1837,  Turin),  etc., 
leading  to  his  appointment  about  1839  as  conductor  at  Lisbon;  the  fine 
Neapolitan  contrapuntist  Carlo  Conti  (d.  1868),  who  had  success  with  L1  Olim - 
piade  (1829,  Naples)  ; and  Luigi  Ricci  (d.  1859),  also  of  Naples,  among 
whose  30  works  were  Amina  (1829,  Rome),  Chiara  di  Rosemberg  (1831, 
Milan),  and  Un'avventura  di  Scaramuccia  (1835,  Milan),  which  were 
admired  outside  of  Italy. 

From  1829  to  ’43,  when  Verdi  first  became  a power,  many  composers 
began  to  be  heard,  among  whom  were  the  following : — Lauro  Rossi  (d. 
1885),  trained  at  Naples,  from  1832  conductor  at  Rome,  in  1835-44  on  an 
operatic  tour  to  Mexico,  Havana  and  New  Orleans,  from  1850  head  of  the 
Milan  conservatory,  and  in  1871-8  Mercadante’s  successor  at  Naples, 
producing  almost  30  operas,  of  which  the  chief  were  / falsi  monetari 
(1835,  Milan),  II  domino  nero  (1849,  Milan)  and  La  contessa  di  Mons  (1874, 
Turin),  besides  an  oratorio  (1833),  church  music,  etc.;  Errico  Petrella  (d. 
1877),  another  Neapolitan  pupil,  born  the  same  year  as  Verdi  and  for  a 
time  his  rival  in  Italy,  with  over  20  operas  (none  between  1839  and  ’51),  such 
as  Le  miniere  di  Freibergh  (1839,  Naples),  Le  precauzioni  (1851,  Naples), 
Marco  Visconti  (1854,  Naples),  Elnava  (1855,  Milan),  lone  (1858,  Milan), 
La  contessa  d' Amalfi  (1864,  Turin),  / promessi  sposi  (1866,  Lecco)  and 
Giovanna  II  (1869,  Naples)  ; Alberto  Mazzucato  (d.  1877),  whose  7 operas 
(1834-44)  were  outclassed  by  Verdi’s,  but  who  from  1839  was  an  a^^e  teacher 
at  the  Milan  conservatory  and  from  1872  its  director,  besides  being  concert- 
master  at  La  Scala  in  1859-69  and  an  industrious  literary  worker;  Federico 
Ricci  (d.  1877),  with  about  20  operas  (at  first  with  his  brother  Luigi),  among 
them  La  prigione  d'Edimburgo  (1837,  Trieste),  Corrado  d'Altamura  (1841, 


THE  ITALIAN  OPERA 


549 


Milan)  and  the  brilliant  Crispino  e la  comare  (1850,  Venice);  Teodul 
Mabellini  (d.  1897),  a well-trained  pupil  of  Pilotti  and  Mercadante,  whose 
special  successes  were  with  Rolla  (1840,  Turin),  II  conte  di  Savagna  (1843, 
Florence)  and  Baldassare  (1852,  Florence),  and  who  from  1843  was  identi- 
fied with  Florence  as  conductor  and  from  1859  as  professor  of  composition 
at  the  conservatory,  writing  also  an  oratorio,  much  sacred  music,  cantatas, 
songs  and  piano-pieces;  Alessandro  Nini  (d.  1880),  who,  after  teaching 
singing  at  St.  Petersburg  in  1830-7,  was  from  1843  choirmaster  at  Bergamo, 
with  several  operas,  chief  of  which  was  La  tnarescialla  d'Ancre  (1839, 
Padua),  and  excellent  church  music,  including  a notable  Miserere ; the  genial 
tenor  Jozef  Poniatowski  (d.  1873),  who  in  1848-70  was  a Tuscan  diplomat  at 
Paris,  and  who  wrote  12  tuneful  operas  (from  1838)  in  Italy  or  at  Paris; 
Achille  Peri  (d.  1880),  conductor  at  Reggio,  somewhat  an  imitator  of  Verdi, 
with  about  10  operas,  the  first  of  popularity  being  Dirce  (1843,  Reggio),  and 
an  oratorio  (i860,  Milan);  and  Carlo  Pedrotti  (d.  1893),  who  in  1840-5 
was  conductor  at  Amsterdam,  lived  long  at  Verona,  from  1868  was  director 
of  the  Turin  conservatory  and  from  1882  of  the  Rossini  school  at  Pesaro, 
with  about  15  buffo  operas,  including  Romea  di  Montfort  (1845,  Verona), 
Gehnina  (1853,  Milan),  Tutti  in  maschera  (1856,  Verona),  and  II  favorito 
(1870,  Turin). 

Among  the  numerous  writers  entering  the  field  from  1843  onward  the  follow- 
ing may  be  selected  as  for  some  reason  notable : — Francesco  Chiaromonte 
(d.  1886),  pupil  of  Raimondi  and  Donizetti,  who,  after  a career  as  a tenor,  un- 
dertook composition,  was  expelled  from  Naples  as  a revolutionist  in  1850, 
went  to  Genoa,  from  1855  was  chorusmaster  at  Paris  and  London,  and  from 
1862  taught  at  Brussels,  producing  9 operas  (1844-55),  especially  Caterina  di 
Cleves  (1850,  Naples),  an  oratorio  (1884)  and  a method  for  singers  ; Antonio 
Cagnoni  (d.  1896),  from  1852  choirmaster  at  Vigevano,  from  1873  at  Novara 
and  from  1887  at  Bergamo,  with  over  20  operas  (from  1845),  chief  of  which 
was  the  farce  Don  Bucefalo  (1847,  Milan),  besides  good  church  music  and  an 
unproduced  grand  opera,  Re  Lear  (1893)  ; the  famous  double-bassist  Bottesini 
(d.  1889),  with  8 well-written  operas  (1847-80),  including  L 1 assedio  di  Firenze 
(1856,  Paris),  Ali  Baba  (1871,  London),  etc.,  an  oratorio  (1887,  Norwich),  or- 
chestral and  chamber  music  and  songs  ; Francesco  Schira  (d.  1883),  from  1842  a 
favorite  singing-master  at  London,  whose  3 early  operas  (1832-7)  at  Milan  and  Lis- 
bon, were  outranked  by  5 later  ones  (from  i849),suchas  Theresa  (1850,  London), 
Nicolb  de'  Lapi  (1863,  London)  and  La  selvaggia  (1865,  Venice),  besides  some 
other  works  ; Pietro  Platania  (d.1907),  from  1863  director  of  the  Palermo  con- 
servatory and  from  1888  of  that  at  Naples,  with  5 operas  (from  1852),  including 
Spartaco  ( 1 893,  Milan),  orchestral  music  and  a treatise  on  fugue  ; Giorgio  Miceli 
(d.  1895),  long  a teacher  at  Naples  and  in  1887-94  Platania’s  successor  at  Pa- 
lermo, with  6 operas  at  Naples  (from  1852),  including  II  conte  di  Rossiglione 
(1854),  2 sacred  operas  (1885-6),  and  church  and  chamber  music ; Filippo 
Marchetti  (d.  1902),  from  1881  the  head  of  the  Rome  conservatory,  with  8 
ambitious  operas,  notably  Gentile  da  Varano  (1856,  Turin),  Giulietta  e Romeo 
(1865,  Trieste),  Ruy  Bias  (1869,  Milan)  and  other  vocal  and  instrumental 
works  ; and  Carlotta  Ferrari,  a pupil  of  Mazzucato  at  Milan,  with  3 successful 
works  (1857-71),  church  music  and  songs,  besides  librettos  and  poems. 


550 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


Measured  by  the  Italian  standard,  the  one  composer  in  the  period  now 
under  consideration  to  be  counted  with  Verdi  was  Amilcare  Ponchielli  (d.  1886), 
who  was  trained  at  Milan.  While  a student  he  wrote  an  operetta  (1851)  and 
while  organist  at  Cremona  undertook  opera  (1856).  His  general  fame,  how- 
ever, did  not  come  till  later,  with  / promessi  sposi  (revised,  1872,  Milan), 
1 Lituatii  (1874),  La  giocotida  ( 1 876),  II  figliuol  prodigo  (1880)  and  Marion 
Delorme  (1885),  besides  other  music.  In  originality  he  did  not  rank  high. 

Here  may  well  be  added  the  Brazilian  Antonio  Carlos  Gomez  (d.  1896),  a 
pupil  of  Rossi  at  Milan,  who  produced  in  Italy  or  at  Rio  de  Janeiro  several 
works  (from  1861),  including  II  Guar  any  (1870,  Milan),  Salvator  Rosa 
(1874,  Venice),  Maria  Tudor  (1877,  Milan)  and  Lo  schiavo  (1889,  Rio). 


204.  Development  of  the  Opera  Comique.  — The  form  of  opera 

for  which  French  composers  have  shown  a spontaneous  and 
unwearied  capacity  is  the  opera  comique,  the  nature  of  which, 
however,  has  not  been  constant.  At  its  outset,  it  was  in  part 
an  adaptation  of  the  not  over-refined  Italian  opera  buff  a to  the 
gay  and  witty  taste  of  France,  in  part  an  evolution  from  the 
only  half-musical  vaudeville,  and  in  part,  too,  a light  application 
of  some  technical  methods  found  in  non-Italian  forms  of  serious 
opera.  In  the  hands  of  Boieldieu  and  Auber  the  type  became 
distinct  and  so  satisfactory  that  it  not  only  led  onward  to  the 
modern  French  opera,  but  more  or  less  influenced  all  but  the 
most  strenuous  tragic  opera  everywhere  (see  sec.  177). 

Largely  because  of  its  adaptable  nature,  it  was  open  to  the 
influence  of  somewhat  delicate  poetic  tendencies  and  even  of 
vigorous  imagination.  Hence,  as  time  went  on  and  the  usual 
range  of  social  topics  became  somewhat  exhausted,  the  opera 
comique  often  acquired  a sentiment  and  fancy  that  were  not 
its  original  characteristics.  Out  of  it  grew  the  modern  French 
romantic  opera.  From  about  i860  its  distinctness  as  a type 
steadily  diminished,  for  in  technical  methods  it  approximated 
the  grand  opera,  and  in  substance  and  structure  it  was  more 
romantic  than  merely  diverting.  Meanwhile,  however,  the  old 
craving  for  amusement  pure  and  simple  was  satisfied  by  the 
rise  of  the  brief,  captivating  operetta  of  the  Offenbach  type. 

The  progress  of  the  opera  comique  through  the  middle  of  the 
century  was  not  dominated  by  any  one  composer,  though  Auber 
continued  to  be  one  of  its  leading  exemplars.  Neither  did  it 
call  out  any  composer  of  first-rate  genius.  But  in  their  re- 
spective ways  there  were  several  able  contributors,  like  Hatevy, 


THE  OPERA  COMIQUE 


551 


Adam,  Grisar  and  Thomas  in  the  older  group  and  Gounod, 
Reyer,  Delibes  and  Bizet  in  the  later.  With  these  latter  the 
drift  toward  romanticism  became  evident. 

A special  word  should  be  added  about  the  influence  of  this 
French  type  upon  opera  elsewhere.  The  fact  that  Paris  main- 
tained itself  as  on  the  whole  the  leading  operatic  centre  of 
Europe  made  whatever  was  done  there  notable.  Although  the 
true  opera  comique  could  not  well  be  transported  bodily  to 
other  social  conditions,  except  in  selected  instances,  yet  the 
styles  it  favored  were  diligently  studied  by  composers,  and  its 
vivacity,  sparkle  and  verve  became  objects  of  fruitful  emulation 
everywhere.  As  a counterpoise  to  Italian  sentimentality  and 
exaggerated  passion,  and  to  German  excess  of  seriousness  or 
learning,  it  certainly  had  value. 

Of  the  composers  already  named  (sec.  177),  Auber  alone  continued  to  pro- 
duce long  after  1830  (till  1869),  being  represented  by  works  like  Fra  Diavolo 
(1830),  Le  bal  masque  (1833),  Le  domino  noir  (1837),  Les  diamants  de  la 
couronne  (1841),  Haydee  (1847)  and  Manon  Lescaut  (1856)  — some  30  in  all. 
His  suavity  and  elegance  of  style  were  widely  acknowledged,  and  his  freshness 
of  invention  continued  almost  unabated.  Into  the  field  of  opdra  comique  the 
restless  Meyerbeer  essayed  to  enter  with  his  Uetoile  du  Nord  (1854)  and 
Dinorah  (1859).  His  influence  served  to  help  forward  the  transformation  of 
the  type  into  something  more  pretentious  and  less  individually  French. 

Fromental  HalSvy  (d.  1862)  was  of  Jewish  descent,  born  at  Paris  in  1799. 
In  1809-19  he  studied  at  the  Conservatoire,  especially  with  Berton  and  Cheru- 
bini, finally  winning  the  Prix  de  Rome.  Before  returning  to  Paris  in  1822  he 
had  written  3 operas,  considerable  church  music  and  a few  piano  works. 
From  1827  he  was  teacher  of  harmony  at  the  Conservatoire,  from  1833  of 
counterpoint  and  from  1840  of  composition,  being  closely  associated  with 
Cherubini  in  his  last  years  and  collaborating  on  his  theoretical  treatise  (1835). 
From  1827,  also,  he  was  accompanist  at  the  Theatre  Italien  and  in  1830-56 
chef  de  chant  at  the  Op^ra.  In  1836  he  succeeded  Reicha  as  member  of  the 
Academy,  being  from  1854  its  secretary.  His  first  efforts  to  gain  recognition 
were  disappointing,  but  success  began  to  come  with  Clari  and  Le  dilettante 
d' Avignon  (both  1829)  and  the  ballet  Manon  Lescaut  (1830).  But  his  fame 
was  made  in  1835  by  the  almost  simultaneous  production  of  the  grand  opera  La 
juive  and  the  op£ra  comique  L'lclair , each  a masterpiece  in  its  field.  Dur- 
ing the  next  23  years  he  wrote  almost  an  opera  per  year,  sometimes  in  the 
lighter  vein,  as  Les  mousquetaires  (1846),  La  dame  de  pique  (1850)  and  Le 
Nadab  (1853),  often,  too,  in  grand  opera  form,  as  La  reine  de  Chypre  (1841), 
Charles  VI  (1843)  and  La  tempesta  (Italian,  based  on  Shakespeare,  1850, 
London).  He  had  genuine  poetic  susceptibility,  with  positive  musical  and 
dramatic  gifts,  and  was  learned  in  the  technique  of  composition,  but  sought 
to  be  too  versatile,  produced  too  much,  often  with  poor  librettos,  distorted  his 


552 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


natural  style  in  the  desire  to  emulate  Meyerbeer,  was  often  obscure  and  gen- 
erally unequal.  For  all  these  reasons  he  failed  of  a decided  hold  upon  the 
public.  He  is  also  known  by  music  for  Prometheus  Unbound  (1849),  2 can- 
tatas, songs,  male  part-songs,  a text-book  in  elementary  singing,  and  two  col- 
lections of  reminiscences  and  eulogies  (1861-3).  Two  unfinished  operas  were 
completed  by  his  son-in-law  Bizet. 

Adolphe  Adam  (d.  1856),  slightly  younger  than  Hal6vy  and  less  well  edu- 
cated, sprang  into  popularity  with  him  in  1829.  A favorite  pupil  of  Boiel- 
dieu,  he  followed  him  in  producing  over  50  comparatively  light,  but  tuneful 
works,  often  intensely  humorous,  but  much  more  ‘ taking  ’ than  original. 
Among  them  were  Le  chalet  (1834),  Le  postilion  de  Longjumeau  (1836), 
which  at  once  became  famous  throughout  Europe,  Le  brasseur  de  Preston 
(1838),  Le  roi  d'Yvetot  (1842),  Cagliostro  (1844),  etc.,  besides  many  bril- 
liant ballets,  like  Giselle  (1841).  His  few  efforts  in  grand  opera  were  wholly 
unsuccessful.  In  1847,  having  quarreled  with  the  Opdra-Comique,  he  started 
an  independent  operatic  enterprise,  which  in  the  Revolution  of  1848  failed  dis- 
astrously. Five  years  of  hard  work  were  needed  to  recover  himself.  From 
1849  he  was  his  father’s  successor  at  the  Conservatoire.  He  continued  to 
compose  and  also  became  known  as  a genial  newspaper  critic.  Some  of  his 
articles  and  reminiscences  were  published  posthumously  (1857-9). 

Albert  Grisar  (d.  1869),  though  Belgian  by  birth,  was  identified  with  Paris 
from  1830,  where  he  first  studied  and  in  1836-40  produced  8 pleasing  come- 
dies. From  1840  he  spent  several  years  in  careful  study  with  Mercadante  at 
Naples.  From  1848,  again  in  Paris,  he  wrote  about  25  more  works,  of  which 
only  half  were  actually  performed,  besides  some  scenas  and  over  50  songs. 
Among  the  later  operas  were  Gilles  ravisseur  (1848),  Les  porcherons  (1850), 
Le  chien  du  jardinier  (1855),  and  4 after  i860.  His  talent  was  poetic  and 
graceful,  but  slender  and  unoriginal. 

Ambroise  Thomas  (d.  1896)  stands  on  a higher  level  than  the  foregoing. 
Born  at  Metz  in  1811,  he  had  four  brilliant  years  at  the  Conservatoire  under 
Zimmerman,  Kalkbrenner,  Dourlen  and  the  veteran  Le  Sueur,  taking  the  Prix 
de  Rome  in  1832.  He  immediately  began  writing  chamber,  church  and  piano 
music  to  good  purpose.  After  visiting  the  the  chief  Italian  cities  and  Vienna, 
he  began  at  Paris  the  series  of  nearly  25  operas  and  ballets  by  which  gradu- 
ally his  fame  was  secured.  In  1851  he  became  an  Academician,  and  in  1871 
took  Auber’s  place  as  head  of  the  Conservatoire.  His  last  25  years  were 
largely  occupied  by  fruitful  administrative  and  educational  effort.  His  work 
as  a composer  exhibited  interesting  stages  of  growth,  which  at  once  illustrated 
and  directed  the  progress  of  French  opera.  His  first  10  works,  from  La 
double  ichelle  (1837)  to  Mina  (1843)  and  the  ballet  Betty  (1846),  were  operas 
comiques,  written  with  graceful  and  careful  finish,  but  not  essentially  different 
from  the  best  of  Auber  or  Hdrold.  The  second  series  of  8 included  I^e  Caid 
(1849),  Le  songe  d'une  nuit  d'eti  (1850),  Raymond  (1851),  Psyche  (185 7), 
etc. , which,  though  not  strikingly  successful  with  the  public,  marked  the  tran- 
sition to  romantic  poetry  through  which  the  old  opdra  comique  was  to  acquire 
new  vitality.  Finally  came  larger  and  finer  works,  including  the  famous 
Mignon  (1866)  and  the  grand  operas  Hamlet  (1868)  and  Franqoise  de  Rimini 
(1882),  which  belong  to  the  modern  period.  His  style  is  characterized  by 


THE  OPERA  COMIQUE 


553 


great  dramatic  truth,  by  striking  versatility  in  handling  characters  and  situa- 
tions and  by  a thorough  mastery  of  orchestration.  Had  his  gift  of  real  musi- 
cal invention  been  greater,  he  would  have  ranked  among  the  best  opera- 
writers.  Besides  his  operas,  he  also  wrote  fine  male  choruses,  some  religious 
works,  including  2 masses,  2 cantatas  and  considerable  chamber  music. 

Among  the  many  lesser  writers  who  appeared  before  about  1850  may  be 
named  Antoine  Louis  Clapisson  (d.  1866),  a violinist  and  collector  of  instru- 
ments (his  collection  becoming  in  1861  the  nucleus  of  the  Conservatoire 
museum),  with  over  20  clever  operas  (1838-61)  and  about  200  songs  ; Prince 
de  la  Moskowa  [Joseph  Napoleon  Ney]  (d.  1857),  the  distinguished  son  of 
Marshal  Ney,  who  in  1843  organized  and  conducted  a society  for  the  study 
of  vocal  works  from  the  i6-i7th  centuries,  published  a remarkable  col- 
lection for  it  (11  vols.),  was  known  as  a critic,  and  wrote  2 successful  operettas 
(1840, ’55)  ; Paul  Muriel  (d.  1897),  a leading  musician  at  Toulouse,  finally  in 
charge  of  the  conservatory,  with  6 stage-works  (c.  1840-86),  including  the 
grand  opera  L'armorique , a symphony,  an  oratorio  and  chamber  music ; the 
violinist  and  critic  Georges  Bousquet  (d.  1854),  with  3 operas  (1844-52)  and 
considerable  other  music;  Jean  Francois  EugSne  Gautier  (d.  1878),  from  1848 
assistant  conductor  at  the  Theatre  Lyrique,  and  from  1864  chef  de  chant  at 
the  Thdatre  Italien  and  professor  at  the  Conservatoire,  with  14  operas  ( 1 845— 
64),  an  oratorio,  etc. ; Francis  Bazin  (d.  1878),  winner  of  the  Prix  de  Rome 
in  1840  and  from  1844  professor  at  the  Conservatoire,  first  of  singing,  then 
of  harmony  and  from  1871  of  composition,  with  9 operas  (1846-70),  including 
La  nuit  de  la  St.-Sylvestre  (1849)  and  Madelon  (1852),  besides  a manual  on 
theory  ; Louis  [or  Aime]  Maillart  (d.  1871),  who  won  the  Prix  de  Rome  in  1841 
and  wrote  6 operas,  including  Gastibelza  (1847),  Lacroix  de  Marie  (1852)  and 
Les  dragons  de  Villars  (1856)  ; Napoleon  Henri  Reber  (d.  1880),  from  1851 
professor  of  harmony  at  the  Conservatoire,  from  1862  of  composition  and  from 
1871  inspector  of  branch  institutions,  distinguished  as  a general  composer  and 
theorist,  with  a few  stage-works  (1848-57)  and  an  unperformed  grand  opera 
(see  sec.  212) ; Felix  Marie  [or  Victor]  Masse  (d.  1884),  the  Prix-winner  in 
1843,  from  i860  chorusmaster  at  the  Opera,  from  1866  professor  of  counter- 
point at  the  Conservatoire  and  from  1872  an  Academician,  gaining  popular 
applause  by  his  early  songs  and  about  20  operas,  from  La  chambre  gothique 
(1849),  Galathee  (1852)  and  Les  noces  de  Jeannette  (1853)  to  Paul  et  Virginie 
(1876)  and  Une  nuit  de  Cleopdtre  (1877)  ; Aristide  Hignard  (d.  1898),  an 
ambitious  worker,  with  about  10  operas  (from  1851),  including  the  grand 
opera  Handet  (1888),  besides  vocal  and  piano-pieces;  and  Jean  Alexandie 
Ferdinand  Poise  (d.  1892),  pupil  and  imitator  of  Adam,  with  14  operas, 
from  the  successful  Bonsoir , voisin  (1853)  to  Le  medecin  malgre  lui  (1887). 

Friedrich  von  Flotow  (d.  1883),  though  German  by  birth,  was  a Parisian 
by  training  and  in  style.  In  1835-48  and  1863-8  he  worked  at  Paris  and 
often  visited  it  later.  In  1856-63  he  was  court-intendant  at  Schwerin,  and 
after  1868  lived  chiefly  near  Vienna.  Of  his  over  25  stage-works,  mostly 
light,  the  most  successful  were  Le  naufrage  de  la  Meduse  (1853,  Paris), 
Stradella  (1844,  Hamburg),  the  popular  Martha  (1847,  Vienna),  Indra 
(1853,  Berlin)  and  L'ombre  (1870,  Paris).  His  easy  melodiousness  was  not 
supported  by  much  structural  skill. 


554 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


In  the  works  of  the  next  group  of  composers,  especially  when 
produced  after  1870,  the  distinctly  romantic  tendency  is  more 
manifest,  so  that  in  many  instances  the  type  is  no  longer  called 
‘ opera  comique,’  but  ‘ drame  lyrique.’ 

Among  those  early  in  this  field  were  the  eminent  orchestral  composer  ot 
oriental  predilections  Felicien  David  (d.  1876),  who  wrote  a few  striking 
operatic  works,  especially  La  Perle  du  Bresil  (1851),  Herculanum  (1859) 
and  Lalla  Rookh  (1862)  ; L6on  Gastinel,  with  about  10  operas  (from  1853), 
extending  to  recent  years,  besides  oratorios,  masses,  works  for  orchestra,  etc. ; 
Louis  Etienne  Ernest  Reyer,  David’s  successor  in  the  Academy  (and,  like  him, 
at  first  fond  of  oriental  color),  librarian  at  the  Op£ra  and  a brilliant  critic, 
with  7 operas  (from  1854),  including  the  important  La  statue  (1861),  and  the 
more  elaborate  Sigurd  (1884)  and  Salammbo  (1890),  besides  choral  works  — 
in  his  later  writing  frankly  adopting  Wagner’s  ideas;  Louis  Pierre  Defies 
(d.  1900),  pupil  of  Halevy,  Prix-winner  in  1847  and  long  in  charge  of  the 
Toulouse  conservatory,  with  15  operas  (1855-98),  often  very  successful,  and 
many  choral  and  orchestral  works;  L60  Delibes  (d.  1891),  pupil  of  Adam, 
from  1853  accompanist  at  the  Thdatre  Lyrique,  in  1865-72  assistant  chorus- 
master  at  the  Opdra  and  from  1881  professor  of  composition  at  the  Conserva- 
toire, still  more  successful  with  a long  list  of  works  of  varying  dimensions, 
especially  the  ballets  La  source  (1866),  Coppelia  (1870)  and  Sylvia  (1876), 
and  the  operas  Jean  de  Nivelle  (1880)  and  Lakmd  (1883),  besides  choruses 
and  songs. 

Especially  characteristic  in  this  connection  was  Charles  Frangois  Gounod 
(d.  1893),  born  in  1818  and  at  first  devoted  to  sacred  music.  He  entered  the 
dramatic  field  with  the  grand  operas  Sapho  (1851)  and  La  tionne  sanglante 
(1854),  and  only  later  with  the  comic  Le  medecin  malgrl  lui — none  with 
much  favor.  But  his  brilliant  Faust  (1859)  was  an  instant  and  general  suc- 
cess, and  was  soon  followed  by  5 others,  of  which  the  more  notable  were 
Mireille  (1864)  and  Romeo  et  Juliette  (1867).  Later  he  added  3 moie 
(1877-81)  of  less  value.  He  excelled  in  suave  melody  and  harmony,  and  in 
handling  the  orchestra  in  accompaniments  and  entr’actes.  But  his  vivacity 
was  not  sustained  in  comic  writing,  and  his  lack  of  vigor  kept  him  from  full 
success  in  serious  drama.  In  the  poetic  domain  between  he  was  more  at 
home. 

Outside  the  limits  here  set  lie  most  of  the  works  of  several  other  composers 
who  first  appeared  about  i860,  like  Georges  Bizet  (d.  1875),  whose  efforts 
before  Carmen  (1875)  had  little  influence,  partly  because  of  their  Wagnerian 
flavor;  Samuel  David  (d.  1895),  writer  of  many  comedies;  and  Ernest 
Guiraud  (d.  1892),  an  American  by  birth,  from  1876  professor  of  harmony  at 
the  Conservatoire. 

One  reason  why  the  opdra  comique  began  to  approximate  to 
the  grand  opera  was  the  appearance  from  1855  of  the  extremely 
light  opera  bouffe  or  farcical  operetta,  especially  as  devised  by 
Offenbach.  The  popularity  of  this  small  and  trivial  form  was 


THE  OPERA  COMIQUE 


555 


so  great  that  the  opera  comique  in  self-defense  sought  to  retain 
its  hold  upon  artistic  taste  by  becoming  poetically  and  musically 
richer,  leaving  the  field  of  broad  humor  to  the  newcomer. 

The  pioneers  in  establishing  these  ephemeral,  but  often  clever  operettas  were 
Florimond  Ronger  [‘Herve’]  (d.  1892),  a singer  who  started  the  Folies  Con- 
certantes  in  1855,  but  was  soon  outranked  and  betook  himself  to  other  cities, 
with  about  50  works  (from  1855)  ; Jacques  Offenbach  (d.  1880),  a Jewish 
’cellist,  in  the  orchestra  of  the  Opera-Comique  since  1835,  wh°  founded  the 
Bouffes  Parisiens  in  1855  and  had  enormous  success  for  many  years,  with 
about  100  works  (from  1853)  ; Emile  Jonas,  also  of  Jewish  birth,  in  1847-66 
professor  of  solfeggio  at  the  Conservatoire,  with  about  20  works  (from  1855)  ; 
and  the  more  gifted  Alexandre  Charles  Lecocq,  with  nearly  50  works  (from 
1857),  the  special  vogue  of  which  did  not  begin  until  1868. 

Another  reason  for  the  change  in  the  opera  comique  was  the 
curious  fact  that  grand  opera,  though  nominally  the  highest 
form  of  French  musical  drama,  was  seldom  actually  written  by 
Frenchmen.  The  repertory  at  the  Opera  was  made  up  either 
of  repetitions  of  older  works,  or  of  those  produced  by  foreigners. 
Until  about  1850  the  field  was  strongly  dominated  by  Meyerbeer 
and  the  Italians. 

Among  the  more  or  less  isolated  works  of  this  class  should  be  mentioned 
4 operas  (1828-55)  of  moderate  success  by  the  Swiss  Niedermeyer  (d.  1861)  ; 
Benvenuto  Cellini  (1838)  and  Les  Troyens  (1863)  by  Berlioz  (d.  1869); 
Francois  Villon  (1857)  and  L'esclave  (1875)  by  Edmond  MembrSe  (d.  1882)  ; 
and  Le  jugement  de  Dieu  (i860)  by  Auguste  Francis  Morel  (d.  1881). 

Intimately  connected  with  French  styles  were  the  operas  and 
operettas  of  Belgian  and  Dutch  composers,  most  of  whom  either 
studied  or  worked  more  or  less  at  Paris.  The  Spanish  school 
of  dramatic  music  received  its  early  impetus  from  Italy,  but  its 
most  characteristic  development  since  about  1830  has  been  in 
the  making  of  ‘ zarzuelas  ’ or  comic  operettas,  which  are  ob- 
viously analogous  to  French  forms. 

The  Belgian  list  includes  2 operas  at  Antwerp  by  the  young  Jean  Francois 
Joseph  Janssens  (d.  1835)  ; 5 at  Brussels  (1845-52)  by  Adolphe  Samuel 

(d.  1898),  who  wras  also  a good  symphonist  and  theorist  (see  secs.  213,  225)  ; 
nearly  20  (from  1847)  by  Karel  Miry  (d.  1889),  assistant  director  at  Ghent; 
8 (1848-60)  by  Edouard  Gregoir  (d.  1890),  the  historical  student  of  Antwerp ; 
over  10  (1848-64,  mostly  first  given  at  Paris)  by  the  historian  Gevaert,  then 
of  Ghent  and  from  1871  director  of  the  Brussels  conservatory;  and  several 
(from  1856)  by  Benoit  (d.  1901),  from  1867  director  of  the  Antwerp  con- 
servatory and  a fertile  author. 


556 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


Although  Holland  received  its  strongest  musical  impulse  from  Germany, 
many  of  its  early  operas  were  French,  as,  for  example,  Guillaume  de  Nassau 
(1832,  Hague)  by  Costard  de  Mezeray  (d.  1887),  then  court-conductor; 
Le  Ba?idit  (1840,  Hague)  by  the  energetic  Jean  Bernard  van  Bree  (d.  1857)  ; 
many  operas  and  ballets  (from  1840)  at  Amsterdam  by  Anton  Berlijn 
(d.  1870);  and  La  siege  de  Leyde  (1847,  Hague)  by  the  Parisian  Adolphe 
Vogel  (d.  1892). 

Among  Spanish  composers  may  be  named  Miguel  Hilario  Eslava  (d.  1878), 
choirmaster  from  1832  at  Seville  and  from  1844  at  Madrid  (see  sec.  221), 
with  3 Italian  operas  (1841-3);  Pascual  Arrieta  y Corera  (d.  1894),  from 
1857  professor  at  the  Madrid  conservatory  and  from  1877  its  director,  with 
about  50  works  (from  1845),  including  the  ambitious  Isabel  la  Catdlica  (1850)  ; 
Rafael  Jos6  Maria  Hernando,  with  about  15  works  (from  1848);  Joaquin 
Gaztambide  (d.  1870),  with  40  popular  comedies  (from  1850)  ; Francisco 
Asenjo  Barbieri  (d.  1894),  from  1868  professor  at  Madrid,  with  over  60  (from 
1850),  also  very  successful;  Cristobal  Oudrid  (d.  1877),  with  over  30  (from 
1850)  ; Manuel  Fernandez  Caballero  ; and  many  others. 

205.  Austrian  and  German  Opera.  — The  development  of 
opera  in  German  during  this  period  wholly  lacked  the  concen- 
tration so  conspicuous  in  that  of  French  opera.  Austria  stood 
slightly  apart  from  Germany  in  that  its  operatic  styles  were 
more  closely  related  to  those  of  Italy  or  France,  especially  the 
latter,  though  opera  in  German,  often  romantic  in  spirit,  was 
becoming  more  frequent.  Germany  was  still  split  up  into  nu- 
merous states,  no  one  of  which  had  absolute  precedence,  and 
between  them  there  was  much  jealousy.  Musically,  the  fore- 
most countries  were  Saxony  (including  the  many  Saxon  duchies), 
Bavaria  and  Prussia,  with  Leipsic,  Weimar  and  Dresden  in  the 
first,  Munich  in  the  second  and  Berlin  in  the  third  as  leading 
operatic  centres.  But  there  were  many  others  — Stuttgart  and 
Darmstadt  in  the  southwest,  Hamburg  and  Hanover  in  the 
northwest,  for  example — and  German  influence  was  strong 
in  Holland,  the  Scandinavian  countries,  Poland  and  Russia. 
Although  the  popular  vogue  of  Italian  opera  continued  in 
many  quarters,  enthusiasm  for  the  romantic  treatment  of  Ger- 
man themes  or  for  a national  comedy  parallel  to  the  French 
opera  comique  was  increasing,  and  in  every  capital  and  large 
city  native  composers  were  pushing  into  view.  Many  of  these 
doubtless  represented  the  ‘ capellmeister  ’ type  of  composer  — 
well-trained,  but  uninspired.  The  ablest  successors  of  Weber 
were  Marschner  and  Lortzing,  but  even  Marschner  was  not 


THE  OPERA  IN  AUSTRIA  AND  GERMANY 


557 


powerful  enough  to  create  a type  of  style.  Soon  after  1840 
‘the  new  school’  began  to  make  itself  felt  under  Wagner  at 
Dresden  and  Liszt  at  Weimar,  but  until  after  i860  its  ambitious 
program  was  strenuously  opposed  by  most  of  the  leading  critics 
and  not  understood  by  the  general  public. 

Among  Austrian  opera-writers  may  be  named  Ludwig  Wilhelm  Reuling 
(d.  1879),  in  1830-54  conductor  at  Vienna,  with  over  35  works  (from  about 
1825),  chiefly  comic  and  light,  but  including  the  romantic  Die  Feuerbraut 
(1829,  Trieste)  and  the  historical  Alfred  der  Grosse  (1840,  Vienna)  ; Anton 
Emil  Titl  (d.  1882),  working  first  at  Prague  and  from  1850  at  Vienna,  with 
5 romantic  works,  including  Die  Burgfrau  (1832,  Briinn)  and  Das  Wolkenkind 
(1845,  Vienna),  with  other  music ; Johann  Vesque  von  Piittlingen  [‘  J.  Hoven  ’] 
(d.  1883),  a lawyer  and  civil  official,  with  6 well-received  operas,  including 
Turandot  (1838),  Johanna  d'Arc  (1840)  and  Liebeszauber  (1845)  ; the 
Tyrolese  Joseph  Netzer  (d.  1864),  with  5 operas  (from  1839),  including  Mara 
(1841)  and  Die  seltene  Hochzeit  (1846),  besides  many  songs  and  orchestral 
works  ; and  the  exceedingly  popular  writer  of  operettas  Franz  von  Suppe  (d. 
1895),  conductor  at  various  Vienna  theatres,  with  about  65  works  (from  1834), 
which  from  i860  followed  in  quick  succession.  With  the  latter  may  be  grouped 
Richard  Gen6e  (d.  1895),  with  some  15  operettas  (from  1857). 

The  Bohemian  or  Czech  group  includes  Franz  Skraup  (d.  1862),  in 
1827-57  conductor  of  the  Bohemian  theatre  at  Prague,  where  he  was  prompt 
to  produce  Wagner’s  early  works,  with  about  10  operas  (from  1826),  including 
Oldrich  a Bozena  (1828)  and  Libusin  shatek  (1835) ; the  song-writer 
Joseph  Dessauer  (d.  1876),  with  5 works,  beginning  with  Lidwinna  (1836, 
Prague)  ; Johann  Friedrich  Kittl  (d.  1868),  in  1843-65  director  of  the  Prague 
conservatory,  with  4 German  operas  (1848-54)  ; Franz  Skuhersky  (d.  1892), 
pupil  of  Kittl,  from  1854  conductor  at  Innsbruck,  from  1866  head  of  the 
Prague  Organ-School  and  from  1869  court-choirmaster,  with  5 operas  (from 
1861),  including  Vladimir , Lora  and  Der  General , besides  20  masses,  etc., 
and  important  theoretical  works  (from  1879)  ; the  distinguished  Friedrich 
Smetana  (d.  1884),  in  1848-56  a teacher  at  Prague  and  in  1866-74,  after  some 
years  in  Sweden  and  Germany,  opera-conductor  there,  with  8 operas,  beginning 
with  Branibori  v £echdch  (1865),  Prodand  nevesta  (1866)  and  Dalibor 
(1868);  Johann  Nepomuk  Skraup  (d.  J892),  from  about  1835  active  as 
choirmaster  and  teacher  at  Prague,  with  Svedove  v Praze  (1867)  and  Vineta 
(1870)  ; Wilhelm  Blodek  (d.  1874),  from  i860  in  the  Prague  conservatory, 
with  the  comic  V studni  (1867)  ; and  Karl  Bendl  (d.  1897),  from  1865  con- 
ductor at  Prague,  with  5 operas,  beginning  with  Lejla  (1868)  and  Bretislav 
(1869). 

The  small  Hungarian  or  Magyar  group  includes  Andreas  Bartay  (d.  1856), 
with  3 early  works,  including  Esel  (1839)  ; Franz  Erkel  (d.  1893),  the  first 
conductor  of  the  National  theatre  at  Pesth,  founder  of  the  Philharmonic  con- 
certs, and  the  first  professor  of  the  piano  and  instrumentation  at  the  conserva- 
tory, with  9 operas  (1840-74),  especially  Hunyddy  Ldszld  (1844)  and  Bank 
Bdn  (1861)  ; the  flutists  Franz  Doppler  (d.  1883),  in  the  Pesth  orchestra  till 


558 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


1858,  and  his  brother  Karl  Doppler  (d.  1900),  conductor  there  till  1865,  each 
with  a few  operas  (from  1847  and  1852)  ; the  violinist  Karl  Hubay  (d.  1885), 
with  Szekler  Madchen  (1858)  and  2 others  ; and  Mosonyi  [Michael  Brandt] 
(d.  1870),  with  Szip  Ilonka  (1861). 

Of  the  German  romanticists  already  named  (see  sec.  172),  a few  continued 
active  after  1830,  especially  K.  Kreutzer  of  Vienna  (d.  1849),  with  more  than 
a dozen  works,  including  his  best,  Das  Nachtlager  von  Granada  (1834)  and 
Der  Verschwender  (1836)  ; Lindpaintner  of  Stuttgart  (d.  1856),  with  about 
10,  among  them  Die  Genueserin  (1838,  Vienna)  and  Lichtenstein  (1845, 
Stuttgart)  ; Marschner  of  Hanover  (d.  1861),  with  7,  including  Des  Falkners 
Braut  (1832,  Leipsic),  Hans  Heiling  (1833,  Berlin),  and  Adolf  von  Nassau 
(1843,  Hanover)  ; and  Reissiger  of  Dresden  (d.  1859),  with  3 (1835-46). 

Gustav  Albert  Lortzing  (d.  1851),  born  of  theatrical  parents  in  1801,  had 
an  unsettled  youth  somewhat  like  Weber’s,  becoming  a ready  actor  and  stage- 
singer,  and  picking  up  some  musical  knowledge.  His  first  works  (1824-32) 
were  short  and  light.  From  1833  he  was  tenor  at  the  Leipsic  theatre,  where 
he  produced  7 operas,  including  the  popular  Die  beiden  Schiitzen  (1837),  Czar 
und  Zimmermann  (1839),  Hans  Sachs  (1840)  and  his  masterpiece  Der 
Wildschiitz  (1842).  His  success  led  to  his  becoming  conductor  in  1844  and 
again  in  1848,  in  each  case  speedily  quarreling  with  the  management.  From 

1844  he  went  hither  and  thither,  producing  4 more  operas,  including  Undine 
(1845,  Hamburg)  and  Der  W aff enschmied  (1846,  Vienna),  and  some  oper- 
ettas at  Berlin,  where  for  a year  he  conducted  small  stage-pieces.  He  died  in 
poverty,  leaving  2 further  operas,  of  which  Regina  has  lately  (1899)  been 
given  with  success.  His  melodic  gifts  were  exceptional,  and  his  works  have 
a singular  freshness  of  humor  and  style,  so  that  several  of  them  are  still 
popular. 

Heinrich  Dorn  (d.  1892),  born  in  1804,  was  thoroughly  trained  at  Konigsberg 
and  Berlin.  After  residence  at  Frankfort,  Konigsberg  and  Leipsic  (where  he 
taught  Schumann),  from  1832  he  was  cathedral-choirmaster  and  finally 
theatre-conductor  at  Riga,  from  1843  town-musician  at  Cologne,  where  in 

1845  he  started  the  school  that  later  became  the  conservatory,  and  in  1849- 
69  court-opera-conductor  at  Berlin,  thereafter  teaching  and  writing  critiques. 
Of  his  13  operas  and  operettas  (1826-65),  Die  Nibelungen  (1854,  Weimar) 
had  the  best  success.  He  also  wrote  church  music,  including  a Requiem 
(1851),  orchestral  works  and  many  popular  songs.  He  was  an  able  conductor 
and  a solid  musician  of  the  old  school.  In  criticism  he  was  strongly  anti- 
Wagner — perhaps  because  of  early  contacts  with  him  at  Leipsic  and  Riga. 
Side  by  side  with  him  at  Berlin  was  the  piano-virtuoso  Wilhelm  Taubert  (d. 
1891),  from  1831  court-accompanist  and  in  1842-70  also  court-conductor  and 
choirmaster,  with  6 operas  (from  1832),  including  Macbeth  (1857)  and  Cesario 
(1874),  incidental  music  to  many  plays,  symphonies,  chamber  music,  songs, 
etc.,  in  a style  sound,  but  not  vigorous  or  inspired.  (Regarding  the  whole 
Berlin  circle,  see  sec.  213.) 

Of  less  significance  are  many  others,  like  Franz  Glaser  (d.  1861),  from  1817 
conductor  at  Vienna,  from  1830  at  Berlin  and  from  1842  at  Copenhagen,  with 
13  operas  (from  1824),  especially  Des  Adlers  Horst  (1833,  Berlin);  the 
Frenchman  Hippolyte  Andr6  Chelard  (d.  1861),  trained  in  Italy,  whose  failure 


THE  OPERA  IN  AUSTRIA  AND  GERMANY 


559 


with  2 operas  at  Paris  (1827-8)  was  made  up  by  successes  at  Munich,  where 
he  produced  4 operas,  including  Die  Hermannsschlacht  (1835),  followed  by 
2 comedies  at  Weimar  (1842-4);  the  eminent  symphonist  Franz  Lachner 
(d.  1890),  most  of  whose  4 operas  (1828-49)  were  brought  out  at  Munich, 
including  Caterina  Cornaro  (1841)  and  Benvenuto  Cellini  (1849)  I the 
violinist  and  critic  Louis  Schlosser  (d.  1886),  long  in  court  service  at  Darm- 
stadt, with  6 operas  (from  about  1835)  and  much  instrumental  music;  the 
talented,  but  short-lived  Otto  Nicolai  (d.  1849,  aged  39),  trained  at  Berlin  and 
Rome,  whose  4 early  works  (1838-42)  were  Italian  in  text  and  style,  though 
reproduced  in  German  at  Vienna,  where  in  1841-7  he  was  court-choirmaster, 
but  whose  famous  comedy  Die  lustigen  Weiber  von  Windsor  (1849)  was 
brought  out  at  Berlin,  where  from  1847  he  was  opera-  and  cathedral-con- 
ductor; Franz  Xaver  Pentenrieder  (d.  1867),  court-choirmaster  at  Munich, 
with  the  popular  Die  Nacht  auf  Paluzzi  and  one  other  (1846)  ; Karl  Man- 
gold (d.  1889),  violinist,  chorus-master  and  in  1848-69  court-conductor  at 
Darmstadt,  with  4 operas,  including  Tatinhauser  (1846),  several  concert- 
dramas  and  successful  chorus  music  and  songs;  Gustav  Schmidt  (d.  1882), 
conductor  at  Frankfort,  with  4 operas,  beginning  with  the  favorite  Prinz 
Eugeti  (1845)  5 the  cultivated  Franz  von  Holstein  (d.  1878),  brought  up  as  a 
soldier,  but  in  1853-9  thoroughly  trained  as  a musician,  partly  by  Hauptmann, 
with  6 operas  (from  1845),  including  the  successful  Der  Heideschacht  (1868, 
Dresden)  and  others  later,  fine  overtures,  chamber  music  and  songs ; Ernst 
II.  (d.  1893),  Duke  of  Saxe-Coburg-Gotha,  with  7 stage-works  (1846-73), 
including  Santa  Chiara  (1853),  Casilda  (1855)  and  Dia?ia  von  Solange 
(1858),  besides  other  works;  Heinrich  Frankenberger  (d.  1885),  from  1847 
in  the  Sondershausen  orchestra,  with  3 works  (1847-63) ; the  Munich 
conductor  and  intendant  Karl  von  Perfall  (d.  1907),  with  4 operas  (1853- 
86),  favorite  cantatas  and  melodramas,  including  Dornroschen , and  excellent 
songs  and  part-songs;  Wilhelm  Karl  Miihldorfer,  from  1855  conductor  at 
Ulm,  from  1867  at  Leipsic  and  since  1881  at  Cologne,  with  5 romantic  works, 
beginning  with  Im  Kyffh'duser  (1855)  ; Wilhelm  Westmeyer  (d.  1880),  with 
Amanda  (1856,  Coburg)  and  Der  Wald  bei  Hermannstadt  (1859,  Leipsic) 
and  good  chamber  music;  Theodor  Hentschel  (d.  1892),  in  1860-90  con- 
ductor at  Bremen,  with  5 works,  beginning  with  Matrose  und  Sanger  (1857, 
Leipsic);  the  Bohemian  Theodor  Bradsky  d.  (1881),  with  Roswitha  (i860, 
Dessau)  and  several  others ; and  August  Langert,  from  1 860  conductor  at 
various  places  and  from  1873  at  Gotha,  with  a series  from  Die  Jungfrau  von 
Orleans  (1861,  Coburg)  and  Die  Sanger s Finch,  (1863,  Coburg).  Several  of 
these  last  belong  rather  to  the  next  period. 

The  Weimar  circle  and  Wagner  are  considered  elsewhere  (see  secs. 
206-210). 

In  Denmark  mention  should  be  made  of  the  distinguished  Emil  Hartmann 
(d.  1900),  from  1840  director  of  the  Copenhagen  conservatory  and  from  1849 
court-conductor,  whose  4 operas  (1832-46)  were  among  his  earliest  works; 
Siegfried  Saloman  (d.  1899),  whose  first  3 operas  (1844-7)  were  written 
at  Copenhagen,  including  Das  Diamantkreuz  (1847)  ; and  Henrik  Rung  (d. 
1871),  with  8 works,  beginning  with  Die  Ersturmung  von  Kofenhagen  (1847) 
and  Federigo  (1848). 


560 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


The  Polish  group  includes  Karl  Kasimir  Kurpinski  (d.  1857),  in  1810-41 
conductor  at  Warsaw,  with  nearly  25  facile  operas  (1811-26),  besides  ballets; 
Victor  Kazynski,  with  3 fairly  successful  works  (1840-8)  at  Wilna,  Warsaw 
and  St.  Petersburg;  and  Stanislaw  Moniuszko  (d.  1872),  who  was  trained 
at  Warsaw  and  Berlin,  from  1840  worked  at  Wilna  and  from  1858  was  con- 
ductor at  Warsaw,  with  15  tuneful  operas  (from  before  1845),  much  church 
music  and  many  songs. 

In  Russia  musicians  from  foreign  countries  had  long  been  made  welcome, 
so  that  the  public  was  familiar  with  many  different  styles.  A conspicuous 
early  instance  in  the  operatic  field  was  that  of  the  Venetian  Catterino  Cavos 
(d.  1840),  the  first  (1799)  of  his  13  Russian  operas  being  so  successful  as  to 
lead  to  his  becoming  court-conductor. 

Alexis  Werstowski  (d.  1862),  a prominent  Moscow  official,  wrote  7 operas, 
of  which  Askold's  Grave  (1835)  had  signal  success,  being  the  pioneer  work  of 
truly  Russian  quality. 

Michail  Glinka  (d.  1857),  born  of  noble  family  in  1804,  is,  however,  usually 
counted  as  the  founder  of  Russian  opera.  Trained  at  St.  Petersburg  and  Mos- 
cow, and  in  Italy  and  Germany,  he  early  became  a fine  pianist,  but  made  his 
reputation  by  the  operas  Life  for  the  Czar  (1836)  and  Russian  a7id  Liudmilla 
(1842),  which  were  not  only  thoroughly  Russian,  but  eminently  modern  in 
dramatic  and  musical  workmanship.  After  1844  Glinka  made  long  visits  to 
France,  Spain,  Italy  and  Germany,  partly  to  introduce  his  works.  He  also 
wrote  brilliant  instrumental  and  vocal  music. 

The  violinist  Alexis  Lwoff  (d.  1871),  a high  army  officer,  in  1836-55  con- 
ductor of  the  imperial  choir,  wrote  three  operas  (1840-6),  besides  a youthful 
work.  The  noted  pianist  Alexander  Dargomyzski  (d.  1869),  who  at  first  fol- 
lowed Italian  and  French  styles,  won  his  place  as  an  opera-writer  by  Esmeralda 
(1847,  but  written  in  1839)  and  still  more  by  Russalka  (1856),  leaving  also  a 
third  opera  (1872),  written  upon  modern  lines. 

Anton  Rubinstein  (d.  1894),  already  referred  to  as  a pianist  (see  sec.  202), 
was  specially  ambitious  in  dramatic  composition,  producing  not  only  13  operas 
(from  1852),  about  half  of  them  in  German,  but  also  5 sacred  concert-operas 
(from  1870),  all  in  German.  In  his  style  the  mixture  of  native  and  acquired 
elements  seems  to  have  been  unfortunate,  his  romanticism  lacking  delicacy,  his 
Slavic  intensity  leading  to  gigantic  efforts  that  are  more  grandiose  that  sublime, 
and  his  invention  being  unequal  to  the  strain  he  put  upon  it.  His  best  dra- 
matic works  all  belong  to  the  recent  period,  and  have  suffered  from  inevitable 
comparison  with  those  of  other  composers. 

Belonging  to  a very  different  group  was  Alexander  Serow  (d.  1871),  an 
enthusiastic  Wagnerite,  who  led  the  way  toward  the  ‘ New-Russian  ’ school 
with  3 powerful  works,  Judith  (1863),  Rogneda  (1865)  and  Wrazyia  siela 

(1870. 

From  the  long  list  of  famous  operatic  singers  of  the  period  only  a selection 
can  be  made  of  some  whose  international  renown  was  striking : — 

The  sopranos  included  from  1819  the  French  Cinthie  (Montalant)  Damoreau 
(d.  1863)  ; from  1828  the  Italians  Guilia  Grisi  (d.  1869),  and,  from  1832,  Fanny 
(Tacchinardi)  Persiani  (d.  1867)  ; from  1834 the  Spanish  Maria  Dolores  Nau; 


OPERATIC  SINGERS  AND  LIBRETTISTS 


561 

from  1837  the  French  Pauline  Viardot-Garcia;  from  1838  the  Swedish  Jenny 
Lind  (d.  1887),  and,  from  1843,  Henriette  Nissen  (d.  1879)  ; from  1846  the 
Italian  Adelaide  Borghi-Mamo  (d.  1901);  from  1849  the  German  Therese 
Tietjens  (d.  1877)  and  the  French  Caroline  (Miolan)  Carvalho  (d.  1895)  ; 
from  1852  the  English  Euphrosyne  Parepa-Rosa  (d.  1874)  ; from  1857  the 
Belgian  D6sir6e  Artot ; from  1859  the  French  Zelia  Trebelli  [Gillebert]  (d. 
1892),  the  Austrian  Pauline  Lucca  and  the  Italian  Adelina  Patti. 

Among  the  altos  were  from  1 8 1 1 the  Italian  Benedetta  Rosamunda  Pisaroni 
(d.  1872)  ; from  1839  the  Italian  Marietta  Alboni  (d.  1894)  ; from  1841  the 
English  Charlotte  Sainton-Dolby  (d.  1885)  ; from  1843  the  Russian  Daria 
Leonowa  (d.  1896)  ; from  1853  the  German  Amalie  (Weiss)  Joachim  (d. 
1899)  ; and  from  1854  the  English  Adelaide  Phillipps  (d.  1882). 

Important  tenors  were  from  1825  the  French  Gilbert  Louis  Duprez  (d. 
1896)  ; from  1837  the  Bohemian  Joseph  Aloys  Tichatschek  (d.  1886)  ; from 
1838  the  French  Gustave  Hippolyte  Roger  (d.  1879),  and  the  Sardinian  Giu- 
seppe Mario  (d.  1883)  ; from  1839  the  English  John  Sims  Reeves  (d.  1900)  ; 
from  1840  the  Italian  Enrico  Tamberlik  (d.  1889)  ; and  from  about  1845  and 
later  the  Germans  Theodor  Wachtel  (d.  1893),  Franz  Nachbaur  (d.  1902), 
Albert  Niemann  and  Ludwig  Schnorr  von  Carolsfeld  (d.  1865). 

Conspicuous  basses  were  from  about  1835  the  Tyrolese  Anton  Mitterwurzer 
(d.  1872)  ; from  1847  the  Italian  Leone  Giraldoni  (d.  1897),  and  the  Belgian 
Camille  Francois  Everard  ; from  about  1850  the  Hungarian  Johann  Nepomuk 
Beck  (d.  1904)  ; and  from  1852  the  French  Jean  Baptiste  Faure ; from  1854 
the  German  Albert  Eilers  (d.  1896) ; from  1857  the  English  Charles  Santley  ; 
from  1859  the  German  Franz  Betz  (d.  1900)  ; and  from  i860  the  Styrian 
Emil  Scaria  (d.  1886). 

In  the  field  of  professional  librettists  no  one  attained  the  level  of  Eug&ne 
Scribe  (d.  1861),  who  has  already  been  named  (see  sec.  179).  Among  lesser 
workers  were  Antonio  Ghislanzoni  (d.  1893),  long  editor  of  the  Milan  Gazzetta 
musicale , Angelo  Zanardini  (d.  1893),  the  Parisians  Michel  Carre  (d.  1872) 
and  Jules  Barbier  (d.  1901),  who  wrought  jointly,  and  the  German  operetta- 
writers  Richard  Gen6e  (d.  1895)  and  Camillo  Walzel  [‘F.  Zell  ’]  (d.  1895),  who 
also  were  colaborers.  Under  this  general  head,  however  should  be  mentioned 
the  remarkable  work  of  Wagner  (d.  1883)  in  supplying  the  poetic  texts  which 
are  an  integral  part  of  his  music  (see  secs.  207-208). 


2 o 


CHAPTER  XXXIV 


WAGNER  AND  THE  RECONSTRUCTED  OPERA 

206.  The  Situation  Confronting  Wagner.  — The  time  at  which 
Wagner  appeared  was  one  favorable  to  a great  musical  dramatist. 
Under  the  lead  originally  of  the  Viennese  composers,  orchestral 
music  had  become  highly  significant,  disclosing  in  a new  way 
the  capacity  of  pure  music  (without  words)  through  forms  essen- 
tially its  own  to  depict  and  symbolize  complicated  emotional 
experiences,  and  bringing  an  advanced  type  of  art  into  intimate 
relation  with  the  mental  life  of  the  age.  To  this  orchestral 
evolution  romanticism  was  adding  a corresponding  expansion  of 
piano  music,  and  notable  enrichments  in  both  solo  and  choral 
song.  But  the  great  field  of  dramatic  music  was  as  yet  but  im- 
perfectly affected.  It  is  true  that  Gluck  a half-century  before 
had  opened  the  contention  for  dramatic  sincerity,  that  Weber 
had  lived  long  enough  to  start  a fresh  movement  toward  imagi- 
native intensity,  and  that  several  composers  were  endeavoring 
to  make  the  tragic  opera  what  its  common  name  implied  — a 
really  * grand  ’ or  capital  artistic  type.  But  Gluck’s  efforts 
came  before  the  forms  of  composition  were  fully  ready  to  bear 
the  strain  demanded,  and  he  was  also  entangled  in  the  old  aca- 
demic notion  about  the  subjects  to  be  taken  for  operatic  treat- 
ment. Weber’s  genius,  real  and  fresh  as  it  was,  was  exercised 
upon  subjects  without  much  moral  grandeur,  if,  indeed,  it  was 
capable  of  attaining  to  them,  and  hence  missed  the  greater  in- 
spirations, being  animated  more  by  fancy  over  the  picturesque 
than  by  profound  imagination.  And  Meyerbeer  and  other 
writers  of  grand  opera,  with  perhaps  a partial  exception  in 
Marschner,  had  not  enough  original  force  to  construct  more 
than  a pretentious  variant  among  the  types  of  concert-opera  that 
had  long  been  prevalent.  The  technical  resources  of  the  opera 
had  plainly  been  enriched,  and  the  range  of  topic  and  plot 
broadened  — on  this  side  the  French  op^ra  comique  having  a 
useful  influence.  But  the  main  current  of  opera-writing  had 

562 


WAGNER 


563 


not  turned  far  from  the  old  channels.  From  1830  to  1850 
European  society  was  in  turmoil  politically  and  intellectually. 
The  time  was  ripe  for  a new  voice  in  the  musical  drama.  When 
just  at  this  juncture  Wagner  began  to  utter  the  seething  thoughts 
within  him,  it  was  at  least  evident  that  his  was  a new  voice. 
Whether  or  not  it  was  the  voice  of  a master  was  for  a long  time 
not  clear  to  the  musical  world.  His  advent  and  the  discussions 
which  it  aroused  at  least  forced  a profound  readjustment  of 
musical  values  and  judgments.  Finally  they  effected  a gen- 
uine reconstruction  of  the  opera. 

Richard  Wagner  (d.  1883)  was  born  at  Leipsic  in  1813,  the  youngest  of 
nine  children.  His  grandfather  and  father  were  petty  civil  officers,  much 
interested  in  the  theatre.  The  father  soon  died,  the  mother  speedily  married 
again,  and  the  boy  was  then  brought  up  at  Dresden  by  his  step-father,  Lud- 
wig Geyer  (d.  1821),  an  actor,  poet  and  portrait-painter.  He  had  good 
schooling  at  the  Kreuzschule,  being  eager  for  Greek,  German  poetry  and  the 
tragic  drama,  but  not  caring  much  for  music,  though  he  did  not  escape  the 
impress  of  Weber.  In  1827  the  family  moved  back  to  Leipsic,  where  his 
education  continued  at  the  gymnasium  and  from  1831  at  the  university.  Con- 
tact here  with  orchestral  music,  especially  that  of  Beethoven,  awakened 
ardent  musical  ambition.  Besides  private  study,  he  had  lessons  from  C.  G. 
Muller  (d.  1863),  in  1829-38  conductor  of  the  Euterpe  concerts,  later  of 
Altenburg,  and  also  from  Theodor  Weinlig  (d.  1842),  the  cantor  of  the 
Thomasschule.  He  plunged  into  minute  studies  of  Beethoven’s  symphonies, 
and  wrote  a sonata,  a polonaise  and  a symphony  in  classical  style  — the  latter 
given  under  Pohlenz  at  the  Gewandhaus  in  1833.  He  knew  Dorn,  but  not 
Schumann.  In  1832  he  visited  Vienna  and  Prague,  hoping  to  gain  a hearing 
for  his  symphony,  and  at  Prague  was  courteously  treated  by  Dionys  Weber, 
director  of  the  conservatory.  Only  in  his  nineteenth  year  did  he  draft  his  first 
dramatic  libretto  and  write  some  fragments  of  the  music.  All  his  early 
enthusiasm  was  for  instrumental  composition. 

In  1833  Wagner  was  at  Wurzburg,  becoming  chorusmaster  at  the  theatre 
where  his  brother  was  tenor.  Here  he  wrote  the  opera  Die  Feen , an  extrava- 
gantly romantic  work,  with  which  he  returned  to  Leipsic.  In  1834  he  became 
conductor  for  a theatric  troupe  having  headquarters  at  Magdeburg.  He 
now  sketched  a second  symphony  and  completed  the  tragic  opera  Das  Liebes- 
verbot,  given  with  small  success  (1836).  The  troupe  ended  in  bankruptcy. 
To  the  pretty  actress  Minna  Planer,  whom  he  followed  to  Konigsberg,  he  was 
married  late  in  1836.  The  season  1836-7  was  spent  at  Konigsberg,  entangled 
again  with  a failing  troupe,  but  with  negotiations  for  a vacancy  at  Riga.  The 
only  significant  friendship  here  was  with  the  Polish  pianist  Eduard  Sobo- 
lewski  (d.  1872).  After  some  months  at  Dresden,  he  was  named  director  at 
Riga,  with  a fair  salary  and  a prospect  of  good  support.  Beginning  there  in 
1837,  he  soon  set  to  work  upon  the  historical  opera  Rienzi  and  began  sketches 
for  Der  fliegende  Hollander.  His  duties  included  some  orchestral  concerts, 


564 


THE  LATER  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


at  which  the  Norwegian  violinist  Ole  Bull  played.  In  1839,  his  contract  having 
expired,  he  impulsively  left  his  debts  behind  him  and  set  out  for  Paris,  going 
by  sailing  vessel  through  the  Baltic  to  London  and  stopping  a month  at 

Boulogne  to  ingratiate  himself  with 
Meyerbeer.  The  latter’s  introduction 
gave  him  access  to  the  Opdra  manage- 
ment, but  led  to  no  commission.  The 
projected  production  of  the  Liebesverbot 
at  a lesser  house  was  upset  by  the  latter’s 
failure.  Wagner  was  kept  from  starva- 
tion only  by  all  sorts  of  hack  work  for 
the  publisher  Schlesinger  and  casual 
essay-writing,  in  which  his  critical  ability 
and  his  constructive  theories  began  to 
appear.  He  formed  a few  useful  friend- 
ships, especially  with  Berlioz,  one  or  two 
artists  and  some  literary  people,  besides 
doing  careful  study  upon  German  myths. 
When  he  sought  to  get  Der  fliegende 
Hollander  accepted  at  the  Op^ra,  the 
only  result  was  an  offer  for  the  libretto 
(given  in  1842  with  music  by  the 
Frenchman  Dietsch).  Two  of  his  overtures  were  heard  at  concerts,  but  with- 
out success.  In  1840  Rienzi  was  finished  and  was  sent  to  Dresden  for  ex- 
amination, and  in  1841  Der  fliegende  Hollander  was  similarly  submitted 
at  Berlin.  His  restless  imagination  was  also  at  work  upon  other  plans. 
In  the  spring  of  1842  he  left  Paris  for  Dresden. 

The  successful  production  at  Dresden  first  of  Rienzi  (1842)  and  soon  after 
of  Der  fliegende  Hollander  (1843)  led  to  Wagner’s  being  made  court-choir- 
master in  place  of  Morlacchi  (d.  1841).  For  a brief  time  the  two  operas  were  in 
request  at  other  cities,  bringing  Wagner  some  much-needed  income.  Though 
beset  by  opposition  active  and  passive,  he  pushed  on  energetically  to  raise  the 
level  of  the  Dresden  opera  by  giving  works  of  high  class,  to  establish  significant 
orchestral  concerts,  and  to  consolidate  the  choral  interests  of  the  city  (being 
leader  of  the  Liedertafel  for  a time).  He  was  also  full  of  original  projects  for 
librettos  and  operas.  Tannhduser  was  soon  finished  and  given  (1845),  ^ut 
was  violently  attacked  by  the  critics.  Lohengrin  was  finished  in  1847  (first 
given  by  Liszt  at  Weimar,  1850).  His  position  grew  increasingly  difficult.  His 
personality  was  passionate  and  uncompromising,  his  ambition  and  ideality  ar- 
dent, his  musical  dialect  unconventional.  The  conservatives  and  sticklers  for 
usage  found  him  incomprehensible  or  obnoxious.  Schumann  (in  Dresden  in 
1844-50)  and  Hiller  (there  in  1845-7)  only  partially  understood  him.  His 
local  friends  were  few,  such  as  the  conductors  Fischer  and  Rockel,  the  singers 
Tichatschek  and  Schroder-Devrient,  and  the  violinist  Uhlig.  At  Berlin  he  was 
supported  by  the  editor  Gaillard,  at  Cassel  by  Spohr  and  at  Weimar  by  Liszt. 
But  he  was  bitterly  assailed  by  the  critics  Schladebach  and  Banck,  and  was 
viewed  with  jealousy  by  Meyerbeer.  In  1848  he  made  two  or  three  untactful 
moves,  especially  a project  for  a National  Theatre,  and  presently  became  seri- 


WAGNER 


565 


ously  involved  in  the  heated  political  discussions  and  uprisings  that  succeeded 
the  Revolution  at  Paris.  In  1849  he  was  forced  to  flee  as  a suspect  to  Liszt 
at  Weimar,  whence  he  was  smuggled  off  to  Paris,  and  soon  settled  at  Zurich. 

The  fifteen  years  that  followed  were  mainly  occupied  by  literary  work  and 
composition.  His  essays  and  books,  with  the  productions  of  his  earlier  operas 
at  various  places,  brought  him  some  money,  but  he  was  partly  supported  by 
Liszt  and  other  friends.  His  inquisitive  mind  prompted  him  to  extensive 
researches  in  the  history  of  the  drama  and  in  the  stores  of  legend  from  which 
drama  may  be  fed.  His  eagerness  for  expression  found  relief  in  copious 
literary  production,  both  polemic  or  philosophic  prose  and  highly  original 
poetry.  And  soon  began  to  come  forth  the  titanic  operatic  cycle  in  which  he 
embodied  his  ultimate  theory  of  the  opera  and  by  which  his  fame  was  later  to 
be  established.  From  1854  he  became  deeply  interested  in  the  writings  of 
Schopenhauer  (d.  i860),  whose  pessimistic  philosophy  plainly  affected  all  his 
subsequent  thought  and  art.  The  spell  of  his  personality  drew  some  friends 
around  him,  like  the  revolutionary  poet  Herwegh  (d.  1875),  the  Berlin  mer- 
chant Wesendonck  (d.  1896)  and  his  poetic  wife  (d.  1902),  the  musician 
Baumgartner  (d.  1867),  and  others.  The  young  Biilow  followed  him  as  a 
special  pupil.  Through  him  and  Abt  (till  1852  director  at  the  Zurich  theatre) 
he  had  some  contact  with  dramatic  music,  and  from  time  to  time  he  under- 
took subscription-concerts,  at  which  extracts  from  his  operas  were  given.  In 
1855  Tannhauser  was  produced  at  Zurich.  In  1855,  also,  he  served  as  con- 
ductor for  the  London  Philharmonic,  there  again  meeting  Berlioz.  The 
prose  drama  ‘Wieland  der  Schmiedt 1 (intended  as  the  basis  for  a French 
opera)  and  the  poems  of  the  Nibelungen  Tetralogy  were  completed  before 
1853.  The  music  for  Das  Rheingold  was  drafted  in  1853-4,  that  for  Die 
IValkiire  in  1854-6,  and  that  for  Siegfried  begun  in  1857.  In  1857-9  he 
turned  aside  to  complete  Tristan  und  Isolde , for  which  he  hoped  soon  to  get 
a hearing  at  Carlsruhe.  In  1858  began  the  difficulties  with  his  wife  that 
ended  in  their  separation  in  1861  (she  died  in  1866  at  Dresden).  He  moved 
to  Venice  and  Lucerne,  whence  in  1859  he  went  to  Paris.  In  i860  he  hazarded 
concerts  there  and  at  Brussels  which  involved  him  in  debt  and  roused  much 
hostile  criticism.  Some  partisans  on  his  side  were  won,  however,  and  in 
1861,  by  direction  of  Napoleon  III.,  Ta7inhauser  was  produced  at  the  Paris 
Opera,  but  was  soon  driven  from  the  stage  by  riotous  opposition.  Happily, 
just  here  his  banishment  from  Germany  was  revoked,  and  he  was  called  to 
Vienna  to  assist  in  the  giving  of  Lohengrin  (which  he  had  never  heard)  and 
the  laborious,  but  fruitless  rehearsals  of  Tristan.  On  his  way  back,  Liszt 
and  the  Weimar  circle  gave  him  a memorable  reception,  and  at  Mannheim  he 
found  an  opening  for  a new  work,  Die  Meister singer,  to  which  he  now  de- 
voted himself  at  Paris  (not  finished  till  1867).  In  1862-4  he  gave  concerts 
at  Leipsic,  Vienna,  Prague,  St.  Petersburg,  Moscow,  Pesth  and  other  cities, 
being  received  with  special  enthusiasm  in  Russia.  But  he  was  in  despair 
over  his  finances  and  the  impossibility  of  completing  the  immense  works  on 
hand.  At  this  juncture,  while  at  Stuttgart,  he  received  a summons  from  the 
young  Ludwig  II.  of  Bavaria,  who  had  just  come  to  the  throne,  to  settle  in 
Munich  and  there  work  out  with  ample  support  his  dramatic  ambitions.  (Curi- 
ously, the  day  that  this  invitation  came,  Meyerbeer  died  at  Paris.) 


566 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


The  story  of  the  triumphal  period  after  1864  can  be  only  summarized  here. 
A cardinal  factor  in  it  was  the  unwavering  support  of  the  eccentric,  but  art- 
loving  king.  But  there  came  gradually  a marvelous  change  in  the  attitude  of 
the  public  and  the  critics  toward  Wagner’s  ideas.  He  had  been  pursued  for 
twenty  years  by  every  sort  of  enmity  and  derision,  until  his  music  had  become 
a literary  by-word.  But  now  his  importance  began  to  be  seen  and  finally  his 
mastership  to  be  accepted  with  enthusiasm.  The  king’s  original  plan  was  to 
found  at  Munich  a special  Wagnerian  theatre,  but  local  hostility  was  so 
intense  that  at  the  end  of  1865  Wagner  withdrew  to  Triebschen  (Lucerne), 
where  he  completed  Die  Meister singer  (1867)  and  Siegfried  (1869).  There 
he  met  Cosima  Liszt,  the  divorced  wife  of  Biilow,  and  in  1871  moved  to  Bay- 
reuth, where  it  was  proposed  to  build  an  opera-house  upon  a new  plan  for  the 
production  of  his  works.  This  difficult  project,  with  liberal  help  from  the 
king  and  from  admirers  in  all  parts  of  the  world,  was  consummated  in  1876, 
when  complete  performances  of  the  Nibelungen  cycle  ( Gotterd'dmmerung  hav- 
ing been  finished  in  1874)  were  given  on  a scale  of  notable  elaboration.  The 
enormous  debts  incurred  were  gradually  lifted  by  the  proceeds  of  concerts  and 
operas  elsewhere.  His  last  opera,  Parsifal,  was  written  in  1877-82.  Failing 
health  caused  him  to  spend  the  following  winter  at  Venice,  where,  in  1883,  he 
suddenly  died.  The  burial  was  at  Bayreuth. 

Wagner  was  not  above  medium  height,  but  his  erect,  alert  carriage  and  his 
striking  and  expressive  face  made  him  distinguished.  He  was  active  and 
ardent,  rather  unconventional  in  manner,  though  instinctively  refined  and 
genial,  and  a ready  and  eloquent  talker.  He  was  a constant  and  varied  reader, 
and  full  of  intellectual  interest.  He  loved  luxury  and  was  keenly  sensitive  to 
beauty  in  every  form.  Like  strong  characters  generally,  he  exerted  fascination 
upon  those  who  stood  close  to  him  in  friendship,  but  he  was  uncompromising 
in  his  attitude  toward  opponents. 

207.  Growth  of  his  Artistic  Ideal.  — The  evolution  of  Wagner’s 
artistic  attitude  presents  highly  interesting  points,  psychological 
and  philosophical,  of  which  only  a few  can  here  be  stated.  His 
first  and  always  central  artistic  impulse  was  dramatic.  For  it  he 
sought  expression  variously,  but  chiefly  through  poetry  and 
music.  His  musical  awakening  came  only  after  his  propension 
toward  poetry  and  the  literary  drama  was  clearly  manifest.  Yet, 
when  at  length  he  threw  himself  with  ardor  into  music,  his  early 
ambition  seems  to  have  been  to  emulate  Beethoven  in  the  sym- 
phonic sphere.  It  appeared,  however,  that  his  creative  faculty 
was  not  fully  at  home  in  ‘ absolute  music.’  The  ways  of  such 
music  were  too  formal  in  procedure  and  at  the  same  time  too 
indefinite  in  mental  intention  and  suggestion.  They  may  also 
have  seemed  too  difficult  of  intense  application  in  stirring  the 
public.  Wagner  could  never  remain  satisfied  with  any  artistic 


WAGNER 


567 


means  that  did  not  give  scope  for  vivid  and  powerful  popular 
effect.  Accordingly,  from  his  twentieth  year  he  settled  upon 
the  opera  as  his  favorite  and  almost  only  form. 

It  would  seem  that  in  the  opera  his  individuality  found  itself 
only  by  progressive  experiments.  His  successive  works  exhibit 
a steady  and  remarkable  development.  Yet  the  adoption  in 
some  form  of  most  of  the  technical  methods  by  which  he  is  dis- 
tinguished, considering  how  novel  and  radical  they  were,  was 
astonishingly  speedy.  At  first  he  was  strongly  inclined  to  take 
up  the  ideals  of  the  German  romantic  opera.  But  these  did  not 
meet  his  craving  for  realism  in  his  materials  or  for  ideal  sub- 
limity in  general  topic.  JHence  in  Rienzi  he  turned  frankly  to 
the  historical  opera,  acknowledging,  however,  that  in  musical 
treatment  he  was  making  a concession  to  current  styles  in  order 
to  gain  a hearing.  But  this  again  did  not  meet  his  desire,  except 
that  it  was  popularly  successful.  He  longed  for  subjects  of 
extreme  magnitude,  in  which  there  was  room  for  rich  imagination 
and  symbolism.  The  purely  romantic  type  lacked  sublimity 
and  tragic  pathos.  The  purely  historical  opera  lacked  scope  for 
pure  imagination  and  ease  of  symbolic  application.  Hence 
he  gradually  evolved  a new  type,  carrying  to  culmination  ten- 
dencies that  had  been  somewhat  discernible  for  more  than  half  a 
century,  but  handled  in  detail  in  a way  wholly  his  own.  The 
final  success  of  this  climacteric  effort  came  from  the  fact  that 
in  Wagner  as  an  artist  of  the  first  rank  there  was  an  organic 
combination  of  the  power  fully  to  assimilate  the  best  in  previous 
styles  and  the  power  to  create  for  himself  an  original  method 
of  expression. 

Wagner’s  theory  of  the  opera  rested  on  the  view  that  it  was  properly  a 
drama  in  music,  as  the  Florentines  and  the  earliest  Venetians  had  con- 
ceived it,  not  a musical  work  dramatically  arranged  and  presented.  Its 
genesis  must  be  from  subject,  plot  and  characters  through  text,  action  and 
setting  to  the  detailed  musical  embodiment.  Here  he  was  fully  at  one  with 
Gluck  and  Weber  at  their  best,  and  in  radical  opposition  to  the  Neapolitan 
concert-opera.  But  he  outran  all  predecessors  in  his  insistence  upon 
heroic  and  ideal  topics,  drawn  from  sources  so  removed  from  common 
life  as  to  rouse  the  imagination  to  full  activity,  and,  like  all  great  artists, 
he  instinctively  sought  subjects  that  were  rich  in  moral  symbolism  or  im- 
plication. He  found  the  sublimity  that  he  needed  mainly  in  the  vast 
treasures  of  Teutonic  mythology,  thus  securing  a field  of  ideality  analo- 
gous to  that  constantly  employed  by  the  Greek  dramatists,  but  a field 


568 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


close  to  the  traditions  and  genius  of  the  whole  Germanic  race.  And  he 
further  distanced  all  forerunners  in  the  vigor  with  which  he  proceeded  for 
himself  — not  through  a librettist  — to  work  his  materials  into  plots,  to 
select,  individualize  and  combine  his  personages,  and  to  construct  the  text 
in  full.  In  all  this  his  work  was  that  of  a true  dramatic  poet.  His  final 
method  — the  persistent  use  of  a rugged,  archaic  diction  in  strongly  al- 
literative verse  — was  part  of  his  general  effort  to  remove  the  hearer’s 
mind  from  ordinary  associations  and  stimulate  the  imagination  to  the 
utmost.  But  this  handling  of  the  text  also  followed  from  his  doctrine 
that  in  the  final  embodiment  the  three  expressional  elements,  language, 
action  and  music,  must  be  so  blended  as  to  be  inseparable  — a trinity  with 
the  effect  of  organic  unity.  As  he  proceeded,  the  composite  conception 
of  these  three  took  shape  in  a text  ready  for  stage  presentation,  a plan  of 
actors,  costumes,  settings  and  detailed  action,  and  a musical  score  that 
should  give  complete  tonal  utterance  to  the  sentiments  thus  made  to 
deploy  before  the  audience.  Concerning  his  literary  and  histrionic 
method  this  is  not  the  place  to  speak.  But  the  strictly  musical  features 
are  remarkable. 

The  heart  of  the  Wagnerian  opera  as  a musical  work  is  the  orchestra, 
which  is  treated  not  as  an  accessory,  but  as  the  central  exposition  of  the 
whole  drama.  Here  we  see  the  function  of  the  Greek  4 chorus  1 raised  to 
its  highest  power,  except  for  the  absence  of  words.  The  drama  moves  on 
amid  a continuous  depiction  by  the  instruments  of  the  emotional  process 
involved.  The  text  and  the  action  supply  the  images  of  fact  and  the  in- 
tellectual conceptions  generally  which  are  to  be  associated  with  this  emo- 
tional process,  and  which  justify  it.  At  many  points  the  momentum  of 
thought  may  be  enough  to  enable  the  orchestra  to  proceed  almost  or  quite 
unaided.  No  preceding  composer  had  ventured  thus  to  transfer  the  em- 
phasis to  what  had  been  considered  a mere  apparatus  of  accompaniment. 
Furthermore,  into  the  instrumentation  was  poured  a wealth  of  technical 
invention  for  which  earlier  writers  offer  but  meagre  suggestion.  The 
make-up  of  the  orchestra  was  enlarged  by  adding  new  instruments  to  the 
standard  classical  nucleus.  New  effects  were  devised,  such  as  the  use  of 
extended  passages  for  divided  violins  playing  in  harmonics.  A system 
of 4 leitmotive  ’ was  gradually  developed  — characteristic  themes  regularly 
attached  to  particular  emotional  or  personal  elements  in  the  plot,  recur- 
ring in  some  form  whenever  these  special  elements  appear  in  fact  or  even 
in  thought.  All  the  received  methods  of  composition — harmony,  coun- 
terpoint and  form  — were  stretched  to  their  limits  with  an  imperial  origi- 
nality and  independence,  so  as  to  increase  their  emotional  expressiveness 
to  the  utmost.  This  making  the  orchestra  the  dramatic  protagonist  was 
the  most  daring  feature  of  his  work.  Its  substantial  validity  is  attested 
by  its  profound  effect  not  only  upon  all  later  opera-writers,  but  also  upon 
most  later  writers  of  purely  orchestral  music.  It  was  a consummation 
of  the  great  orchestral  development  that  began  with  the  classical  Viennese 
composers,  but  it  was  executed  in  terms  wholly  different  from  theirs. 
Many  of  the  details  correspond  to  those  in  the  orchestral  innovations  of 
Berlioz. 


WAGNER 


569 


The  vocal  elements  — soloists  and  chorus  — are  treated  chiefly  as  mere 
parts  of  the  tonal  ensemble.  They  are  prominent  only  so  far  as  dramatic 
exigencies  require,  especially  where  fact  or  thought  is  emphasized,  or 
where  the  traits  and  passions  of  the  individual  personage  are  in  the 
foreground.  The  traditional  division  of  acts  into  scenes  is  almost 
wholly  discarded.  Neither  recitatives  nor  arias  in  set  form  are  found, 
though  the  technical  methods  of  both  are  freely  used.  The  favorite  solo 
style  is  a sort  of  arioso,  in  which  the  dramatic  and  the  lyric  are  blended  — 
a type  of  melody  lyrically  far  richer  than  the  recitative  and  dramatically 
more  flexible  and  revelatory  than  the  aria  proper. 

The  Wagnerian  melody  was  so  novel  as  to  challenge  general  criticism. 
Technically,  it  differed  widely  from  classical  melody  — in  ‘ form  1 or  lay- 
out, in  its  framework  of  chords  and  modulations,  in  its  extreme  flexibility, 
in  its  wealth  of  pictorial  or  passional  suggestion.  Its  basis  was  not  the 
naive  and  symmetrical  folk-song,  but  the  ecstatic  or  epic  declamation. 
His  operas  were  at  first  said  to  be  unmelodic  because  of  their  lack  of 
1 tunes,’  but  they  were  really  packed  with  melody  of  the  most  varied  and 
vivid  import.  The  projection  of  this  is  mostly  orchestral  and  polyphonic, 
but  in  the  ensemble  the  soloist  singer  is  often  highly  conspicuous. 

In  consequence  of  his  theory  of  absolutely  ductile  melody,  Wagner  was 
an  apparent  innovator  in  harmonic  procedure,  in  counterpoint,  in  ‘ form,’ 
and  in  vocalization,  as  well  as  in  instrumentation.  He  was  seemingly 
impatient  with  all  the  old  rules,  formulae  and  traditions.  His  demands 
upon  singers  were  thought  by  some  to  be  preposterous.  Yet,  when 
closely  analyzed,  his  innovations  in  harmonic  and  contrapuntal  procedure 
and  in  the  art  of  vocal  delivery  appear  to  be  more  or  less  plain  extensions 
of  antecedent  practice  — a sort  of  liberation  for  dramatic  effect  of  implicit 
and  latent  energies.  Hence  under  his  influence,  as  it  became  better 
understood,  began  a reconstruction  of  artistic  methods  that  is  one  of  the 
salient  features  of  all  recent  composition,  instrumentation  and  vocaliza- 
tion. 

208.  Influence  of  his  Views.  — Compared  with  other  composers, 
Wagner  was  unique  in  the  amount  and  substance  of  his  literary 
production.  His  mind  was  studious  and  reflective,  acute  in 
analysis,  and  prone  to  express  itself  in  words.  Circumstances 
forced  him  to  philosophize,  and  copious  writing  was  a relief  for 
his  pent-up  energy.  The  body  of  his  writings  is  altogether  too 
large  to  be  summarized  here,  except  to  note  that  they  belong  to 
several  distinct  classes,  including  much  that  is  strictly  philosophi- 
cal in  aim  and  method,  much  of  a critico-historical  character, 
much  upon  the  art  of  conducting  and  of  large  musical  exposition 
in  general,  besides  abundant  autobiographical  material  and  the 
librettos  of  his  eleven  operas  from  Rienzi  to  Parsifal.  The  most 
of  these  writings  date  from  the  Zurich  period,  so  that  in  date 


570 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


they  lie  close  to  the  mid-point  of  the  century.  Their  appearance 
then  was  the  signal  for  heated  debates  that  lasted  twenty  years, 
if  not  longer.  The  extreme  partizanship  developed  prevented  a 
cool  estimate  of  Wagner’s  views.  But  the  logic  of  events  tended 
to  substantiate  his  main  contentions,  and  in  the  recent  period 
Wagnerism,  at  least  as  applied  to  the  opera,  has  been  a domi- 
nant force.  Yet  it  is  also  clear  that  his  doctrine  about  the  opera 
cannot  be  regarded  as  absolutely  final  or  complete,  since  it 
provides  only  for  opera  in  its  highest  and  most  strenuous  forms. 
The  central  thesis,  however,  regarding  the  control  of  the  music- 
drama  by  dramatic  considerations,  is  plainly  sound  and  capable 
of  universal  application. 

Wagner’s  collected  writings  fill  ten  volumes  (1871-85).  With  the 
autobiographies  may  be  classed  many  notices  of  particular  works  and 
events,  and  reminiscences  of  Spontini,  Rossini,  Auber,  etc.  The  more 
noted  philosophical  essays  or  treatises  are  Die  Kunst  und  die  Revo- 
lution (1849),  Das  Kunstwerk  der  Zukunft  (1850),  Ofier  und  Dra7na 
(3  parts,  1851),  Das  Judenthum  in  der  Musik  (1852),  ‘ Zukunft smusik  ’ 
(1864),  Ueber  das  Dirigieren  (1869),  many  essays  on  the  Bayreuth  en- 
terprise, Religion  und  Kunst  (1880),  etc.,  with  striking  studies  of  Liszt’s 
symphonic  poems  and  of  Beethoven  (1870). 

Many  who  do  not  accept  Wagner’s  theory  of  the  opera  in  all 
its  details,  and  who  perhaps  are  but  slightly  informed  as  to  his 
philosophy  of  music  in  general,  have  yet  been  quick  to  follow 
some  of  his  technical  methods.  Two  or  three  of  his  character- 
istic traits  of  style  may  well  be  emphasized  here,  since  they  have 
exerted  a wide  influence,  far  beyond  the  limits  of  the  opera. 

Wagner  threw  his  whole  weight  with  those  who  were  breaking  away 
from  classical  strictness  and  regularity.  Classical  practice  had  made 
much  of  the  structural  plan  of  composition  and  of  the  perfection  of  its 
elements  or  units  taken  separately.  The  smaller  elements  of  ‘ form,’  for 
instance,  must  be  clear-cut,  the  themes  brief  and  symmetrical,  the  part- 
writing guided  by  careful  rules  derived  from  the  old  vocal  counter- 
point, the  melodic  figures  and  passages  selected  as  far  as  possible  from 
certain  conventional  lists,  the  chords  not  distorted  by  extraordinary  tones, 
the  modulations  managed  according  to  established  usage.  This  stage  in 
practice  was  necessary  to  fix  the  elementary  logic  of  musical  construction. 
But  it  made  composition  too  much  like  architecture.  Tonal  units  were 
treated  too  much  like  lifeless  bricks  or  stones.  Against  this  relatively 
dry  and  mechanical  artistry  the  romanticists  rebelled.  But  at  first  they 
did  not  know  how  to  break  away  from  it.  Wagner  had  the  courage  and 
the  creative  inspiration  to  attempt  a radically  new  procedure.  His  desire 


WAGNER 


571 


was  to  restore  all  the  time-  and  tune-elements  of  music  to  what  he  held  to 
be  their  native  plasticity  and  vital  expressiveness.  Hence  the  enormous 
variety  of  his  phrase-schemes,  of  his  metric  patterns,  of  his  melodic  and 
harmonic  formulae.  Hence  the  untrammeled  flow  of  his  counterpoint 
and  the  exhaustless  evolution  of  his  themes.  The  old  stiff  formality,  as 
of  a military  drill,  is  replaced  by  the  free  interplay  of  social  intercourse. 
When  the  involved  and  novel  effects  of  his  scores  were  first  heard,  it  is 
not  strange  that  they  were  voted  chaotic,  incomprehensible,  iconoclastic. 
But,  as  we  now  see,  this  reaching  after  liberty  and  vitality  was  simply  the 
next  logical  step  for  musical  art.  Wagner’s  importance  consists  not  in 
his  absolute  invention  of  processes  hitherto  unknown,  but  in  the  vigor 
with  which  he  extended  them  to  legitimate  conclusions  and  in  the 
absolute  value  of  the  ideas  and  feelings  which  he  expressed  through  them. 
His  powerful  influence  speedily  affected  every  important  type  of  composi- 
tion, simply  because  the  musical  world  was  ripe  for  an  advance. 

Wagner’s  elaborate  use  of  the  1 leitmotiv 1 in  dramatic  effect  was  evi- 
dently important  for  his  purposes.  As  a technical  device  it  was  not  new. 
But  his  use  of  it  was  unexampled  in  extent  and  power.  It  simply  illus- 
trates his  sense  of  the  living  quality  in  his  tonal  materials.  A thought,  a 
sentiment,  a person,  a thing,  if  we  are  to  employ  it  artistically,  must  be 
so  embodied  as  to  declare  its  individuality.  If  it  is  active  in  a dramatic 
process,  it  must  reappear  in  its  own  recognizable  form.  If  circumstances 
require,  its  tonal  shape  may  change,  though  without  sacrificing  its 
identity.  Just  as  the  original  concept  plays  in  and  out  through  the  plot 
and  the  action,  so  its  tonal  counterpoint  may  be  woven  into  the  tonal 
fabric  by  which  the  drama  is  illuminated  and  enriched.  Here  we  have  a 
special  application  of  the  old  notion  of  thematic  development,  but  the 
motif  is  now  not  a tone-formula,  but  a plastic  organism,  not  a bit  of  glass 
in  a musical  kaleidoscope,  but  a living  actor  in  society. 

Wagner’s  characteristic  tendency  to  push  to  conclusions  the  methods 
that  current  practice  employed  is  finely  illustrated  in  his  free  treatment 
of  the  orchestra  as  an  implement.  He  insists  that  all  instruments  shall 
be  fully  developed  in  compass  and  timbre,  and  that  their  technique  shall 
be  adequate  for  extreme  demands.  He  often  writes  for  more  instruments 
of  a kind  than  had  been  customary,  and  for  some  unusual  representatives 
of  the  wind  groups.  The  various  strings  must  be  numerous  enough  to  be 
divided,  if  need  be,  without  loss  of  dignity  and  sonority.  His  scores  call 
often  for  piccolos,  an  additional  flute,  oboe,  clarinet  and  bassoon,  for 
doubled  or  tripled  horns,  extra  trumpets,  trombones  and  timpani,  for  the 
cor  anglais,  the  bass  clarinet,  the  bass  trumpet,  the  bass  and  even  the 
tenor  tuba,  etc.  His  primary  object  was  to  get  full  harmony  on  occasions 
without  mixing  qualities,  but  he  also  secures  wonderfully  expressive 
effects  by  complex  novel  combinations.  Most  of  his  technical  innova- 
tions were  paralleled  or  transcended  by  Berlioz  (from  whom  he  doubtless 
received  much  impetus),  but  as  an  orchestral  colorist  and  strategist  he 
was  thoroughly  original.  The  artistic  occasion  for  even  his  most  excep- 
tional effects  is  always  a dramatic  necessity,  rather  than  the  virtuoso’s 
desire  for  the  novel  or  surprising  for  its  own  sake. 


572 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


These  are  but  illustrations.  Throughout  the  whole  range  of 
musical  procedure  Wagner  was  emphatically  an  expander  and 
fulfiller,  if  not  an  absolute  pioneer.  The  influence  of  his  techni- 
cal work  became  fully  manifest  only  in  the  latter  part  of  the 
century. 

209.  The  Dresden  Circle.  — Since  Wagner’s  earliest  years  were 
spent  at  Dresden  and  his  first  successes  were  won  there,  this  is 
the  natural  place  for  some  notes  upon  the  personnel  of  its 
musical  circle.  The  Saxon  court  for  fully  two  centuries  had  been 
notable  for  its  attention  to  music.  In  church  music  it  had  long 
maintained  two  establishments,  one  Catholic,  the  other  Protes- 
tant. In  opera  Dresden  had  been  one  of  the  strongholds  of  Ital- 
ian influence  in  Germany,  though  with  the  advent  of  Weber  in 
1816  it  was  gradually  carried  over  to  the  support  of  German 
ideas.  The  court  kapelle  had  some  repute  among  the  orchestras 
of  central  Europe.  The  musical  forces  usually  included  dis- 
tinguished vocalists  and  instrumentalists.  But  the  policy  of 
administration  did  not  secure  chiefs  of  commanding  enterprise 
except  at  intervals,  as  in  the  cases  of  Weber  and  Wagner.  Out- 
side of  the  court  circle  the  only  musical  institutions  of  special 
significance  have  been  the  Kreuzschule,  an  ancient  foundation 
like  the  Thomasschule  at  Leipsic  (though  never  so  eminent), 
and  the  conservatory,  founded  in  1856. 

For  convenience  of  reference,  a summary  follows  of  the  leading  musical 
personalities  at  Dresden  during  the  century  : — 

The  list  of  court-choirmasters  contains  several  overlapping  terms,  due 
to  the  fact  that  various  functions  in  church  music,  the  opera  and  the 
orchestra  have  sometimes  been  distributed.  In  1800  three  choirmasters 
were  in  titular  service — J.  G.  Naumann  (d.  1801),  Franz  Seydelmatin 
(d.  1806)  and  Joseph  Schuster  (d.  1812),  with  the  last  two  of  whom  in 
1802-6  Ferdinando  Paer  (d.  1839)  was  associated  as  operatic  leader. 
From  1810  the  Italian  Morlacchi  (d.  1841)  was  in  charge,  but  during  his 
incumbency  came  in  from  1816  Weber  (d.  1826),  in  1824-26  Marschner 
(d.  1861),  from  1826  K.  G.  Reissiger  (d.  1859)  and  from  1829  Joseph 
Rastrelli  (d.  1842).  Reissiger  was  still  in  office  when  in  1843-9 

Wagner  (d.  1883)  was  given  place  as  opera-director.  He  was  succeeded 
in  1850-72  by  Karl  Krebs  (d.  1880),  and  in  i860  Reissiger  was  followed 
by  the  accomplished  Jtdius  Rietz  (d.  1877),  previously  of  Leipsic,  and 
Krebs  in  1873  hy  Ernst  Schuch.  Rietz  was  succeeded  in  1877  by  Franz 
Wiillner  (d.  1902),  and  he  in  turn  from  1883  by  Adolf  Hagen. 

In  the  court-orchestra  the  post  of  concertmaster  was  held  in  1814-24 
by  the  Italian  Polledro  (d.  1853)  ; in  1839-59  by  the  Pole  Lipinski  (d. 


THE  DRESDEN  CIRCLE 


573 


1861)  ; in  1861-73  by  the  Dresden  Franz  Schubert  (d.  1878),  who  had 
been  in  the  orchestra  since  1823;  in  1873  ?— 89  by  Johann  Christoph 
Lauterbach , with  Henri  Petri  and  Eduard  Rappoldi  (d.  1903)  as  later 
incumbents.  Other  violinists  were  from  1841  Wagner’s  friend  Theodor 
Uhlig  (d.  1853)  ; in  1844-86  Ferdinand  Hiillweck  (d.  1887)  ; and 
from  1847  Karl  August  Gustav  Riccius  (d.  1893).  A number  of ’cellists 
were  important  players  and  composers,  as  in  1811-52  Friedrich  Dotzauer 
(d.  i860)  ; in  1817-64  F.  A.  Kummer  (d.  1879)  > from  i860  Friedrich 
Griitzmacher  (d.  1903),  previously  at  Leipsic ; and  from  1864  the  Pole 
Karasowski  (d.  1892).  Antoti  Schubert  (d.  1853),  the  uncle  of  the 
violinist,  was  double-bassist  in  1790-1844.  Valued  flutists  were  from 
1820  A.  B.  Furstenau  (d.  1852),  and  from  1842  his  scholarly  son  Moritz 
Furstenau  (d.  1889). 

The  double  series  of  court-organists  included  from  1816  A.  A.  Klengel 
(d.  1852)  ; from  1825  Johann  Schneider  (d.  1864)  ; from  1854  Edmund 
Kretschmer ; and  from  1864  Theodor  Berthold  (d.  1882)  and  Gustav 
Merkel  (d.  1885). 

The  cantors  at  the  Kreuzschule  were  from  1785  Christian  Weinlig  (d. 
1813);  from  1814  his  nephew  Theodor  Weinlig  (d.  1842);  from  1817 
Hermann  Uber  (d.  1822);  from  1822  Friedrich  Wilhelm  Agthe  (d. 
1830)  ; from  1830  the  celebrated  Julius  Otto  (d.  1877)  ; and  from  1876 
Friedrich  Oscar  Wermann. 

Other  important  church  musicians  were  in  1842-56  and  from  1861 
Volk  mar  Schurig  (d.  1899);  from  about  1852  Friedrich  Baumf elder ; 
from  1855  K.  A.  Fischer  (d.  1892)  ; and  from  1858  Merkel  (d.  1885). 

The  conservatory  was  started  in  1856  by  the  chamber-musician 
Trostler,  but  in  1859  was  acquired  by  Friedrich  Pudor  (d.  1887),  to 
whom  succeeded  in  1887  his  son  Heinrich  Pudor , and  he  sold  it  in  1890 
to  Eugen  Krantz  (d.  1898).  The  artistic  directors  have  been  from  i860 
Julius  Rietz  (d.  1877)  ; and  in  1877-84  Franz  Wullner  (d.  1902). 
Prominent  teachers,  including  several  from  the  court  forces,  have  been 
from  1856  the  pianist  and  historian  Adolf  Julius  Rtihlmann  (d.  1877)  ; 
the  ’cellist  Kummer  (d.  1879)  ; in  1857-67  the  theorist  Adolf  Reichel 
(d.  1896);  the  flutist  Moritz  Furstenau  (d.  1889);  since  1858  the 
eminent  pianist  Heinrich  Boring;  from  1859  the  pianist  Emil  Leonhard 
(d.  1883);  in  1861-77  the  violinist  Lauterbach ; from  1861  the  organ- 
ist Merkel  (d.  1885)  ; in  1862-1900  the  theorist  Wilhelm  Albert  Risch- 
bieter ; in  1865-74  Ludwig  Meinardus  (d.  1896);  from  1869  the  later 
proprietor  Krantz  (d.  1898)  ; from  about  1875  the  historian  Emil  Nau- 
mann  (d.  1888)  ; from  1874  the  baritone  Gustav  Scharfe  (d.  1892)  ; 
in  1877-93  the  violinist  Rappoldi  (d.  1903)  ; since  1884  the  able  theorist 
and  composer  Draeseke , etc. 

Among  the  more  noted  piano-teachers  of  the  city  have  been  since 
1841  Fritz  Spbidler  (d.  1905)  ; from  1850  Charles  Mayer  (d.  1862)  ; 
from  about  1855  Aloys  Tausig  (d.  1885);  in  1860-78  Magnus  Bohme 
(d.  1898)  ; from  about,  i860  Heinrich  Germer.  Among  the  singing- 
teachers  have  been  in  1848-54  Ferdinand  Sieber  (d.  1895),  and  from 
1862  Louis  Schubert  (d.  1884). 


574 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


Among  the  greater  opera-singers  maybe  named  in  1823-47  the  soprano 
Wilhelmine  Schroder-Devrient  (d.  i860)  ; from  1832  the  bass  C.  W. 
Fischer  (d.  1862);  in  1835-60  the  soprano  Maschinka  (1 Schneider ) 
Schubert  (d.  1882)  ; in  1838-72  the  tenor  Tichatschek  (d.  1886)  ; in 
I^39_7°  ^ie  baritone  Mitterwurzer  (d.  1872);  from  1842  the  bass 
Wilhelm  Dettmer  (d.  1876);  from  i860  the  tenor  Schnorr  von  Carols - 
feld  (d.  1865),  etc. 

Prominent  writers  and  critics  were  from  1839  the  civil  official  Friedrich 
Wilhelm  Opelt  (d.  1863);  from  1840  Schumann’s  friend  Banck  (d. 
1889);  the  physician  Jtrtius  Schladebach  (d.  1872);  in  1848-60  Otto 
Kade  (d.  1900),  later  of  Schwerin;  from  1857  Ludwig  Hartmann ; 
and  from  1859  K.  E.  Schneider  (d.  1893).  It  is  to  be  remembered,  also, 
that  in  1844-50  Schumann  made  his  home  in  or  near  Dresden.  Of  these, 
Banck  and  Schladebach  were  outspoken  in  their  opposition  to  Wagner. 

210.  Liszt  and  the  Weimar  Circle.  — Along  artistic  lines  the 
strongest  influence  in  Wagner’s  favor  came  from  the  cordial  and 
faithful  enthusiasm  of  Liszt  and  the  circle  of  which  he  was  the 
centre.  Liszt  had  won  his  leadership  as  a piano-virtuoso,  but 
after  settling  at  Weimar  in  1848,  though  he  still  wielded  immense 
power  as  the  teacher  of  many  piano-pupils,  he  turned  his 
energies  more  and  more  to  conducting  and  composition.  He 
became  the  apostle  of  musical  progress,  transformation,  even 
revolution.  Around  him  gathered  many  who  were  tired  of  the 
formality  and  pedantry  of  conventional  styles,  and  who  were 
seeking  for  something  which  their  opponents  derisively  termed 
‘the  music  of  the  future.’  For  a full  ten  years  he  used  his  place 
at  Weimar  to  bring  out  neglected  or  novel  operas  and  or- 
chestral works  with  loving  care.  His  own  composition  passed 
over  almost  wholly  into  symphonic  and  choral  forms,  often 
of  marked  originality  and  importance. 

It  was  natural  that  Liszt  should  have  been  drawn  to  Wagner, 
since  in  artistic  aims  they  were  akin.  His  warm  admiration  was 
invaluable  to  the  latter  in  the  dark  days  of  unpopularity  and  exile, 
and  his  practical  wisdom  helped  to  check  the  extremes  of 
thought  and  action  to  which  Wagner  was  liable,  and  to  bridge 
the  chasm  between  him  and  his  detractors.  Liszt  had  no  such 
imperial  gifts  of  creation  as  Wagner,  nor  so  profound  a mind ; 
and  he  had  the  good  sense  and  the  unselfishness  to  merge  his 
light  in  the  blaze  of  the  greater  master  — to  his  own  final  glory 
as  well  as  Wagner’s.  Yet  his  own  creative  achievements  were 
not  small.  Into  orchestral  writing  he  introduced  a change  of 


LISZT  AND  THE  WEIMAR  CIRCLE 


575 


method  analogous  to  that  which  Wagner  made  in  the  opera. 
The  two  composers  were  actuated  by  similar  impulses  at  about 
the  same  time  without  explicitly  deriving  direction  from  each 
other.  We  may  doubt,  however,  whether  Liszt  would  have 
made  the  significant  advance  he  did  if  he  had  not  felt  the 
stimulus  of  Wagner’s  style  and  caught  the  spirit  of  his 
revolution. 

While  other  prominent  groups  in  Germany  were  conservative 
in  tendency,  the  Weimar  circle  became  noted  for  its  radicalism. 
Here  began  several  lines  of  progress  which  ultimately  gave 
character  to  the  succeeding  period,  with  its  tendency  to  recon- 
struct the  whole  fabric  of  musical  style. 

The  early,  pianistic  career  of  Franz  Liszt  (d.  1886)  has  already  been 
sketched  (see  sec.  201).  It  is  supposed  that  one  of  the  influences  that 
diverted  him  into  other  paths  was  his  passionate  attachment  to  the  Princess 
von  Sayn-Wittgenstein  of  Russia,  whom 
he  met  in  1846-7,  and  who  exerted  her- 
self to  turn  him  to  larger  efforts  than 
those  of  a popular  virtuoso.  He  had 
been  connected  with  the  Weimar  court 
as  a visiting  artist  since  1843.  From 
1849  he  was  court-choirmaster  in  resi- 
dence, with  every  facility.  The  most 
striking  feature  of  his  incumbency  was 
the  series  of  operatic  and  orchestral 
performances  under  his  direction.  These 
included,  among  others, Wagner’s  Tann- 
h'auser  in  1849,  his  Lohengrin  in  1850, 

Raff’s  Konig  Alfred  and  Rubinstein’s 
Dasverlorene  Parodies  in  1851,  Berlioz’ 

Benvenuto  Cellini  in  1 85  2,  W agner’s  Der 
fliegende  Hollander  in  1853,  Schubert’s 
Alfonso ed Estrella  and  Rubinstein’s  Die 
sibirischen  Jager  in  1854,  Schumann’s 
Genoveva , Lassen’s  Landgraf  Ludwigs  Brautfahrt  in  1857,  Cornelius’  Der 
Barbier  von  Bagdad  in  1858,  besides  large  orchestral  works  by  Berlioz, 
Schumann,  Raff  and  others.  His  fame  as  a conductor  led  to  his  directing 
many  festivals  in  1852-9,  as  at  Ballenstedt,  Carlsruhe,  Vienna,  Magdeburg, 
Aix  and  Leipsic.  His  advocacy  of  Wagner  and  Berlioz  aroused  widespread 
discussion,  with  a ranging  of  critics  and  composers  into  parties  throughout  Ger- 
many. In  the  war  of  ideas  the  Netie  Zeitschrift  at  Leipsic  became  the  leading 
organ  of  the  ‘ New-German  ’ spirit.  Of  special  importance  in  this  movement 
were  Liszt’s  own  ‘symphonic  poems,’  including  Tasso  (1849),  Prometheus 
(1850),  Orpheus,  Les  Preludes  and  Mazeppa  (all  1854),  Die  Ideale , the 


576 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


Faustsymphonie  and  Die  Hunnenschlacht  (all  1857),  etc.,  his  cantatas  Die 
Macht  der  Musik  (1850)  and  An  die  Kiinstler  (1853),  and  his  piano-concertos 
(1855-7)  — all  works  cast  in  large  moulds,  full  of  poetic  inspiration  and 
tending  to  break  away  from  traditional  conventions  of  form.  To  this  period, 
also,  belong  many  of  his  literary  writings,  such  as  the  essays  on  Lohengrin  and 
Tannhauser  (1851),  on  Chopin  (1852),  on  Field's  Nocturnes  (1859)  and  on 
Hungarian  Gipsy-Music  (1861). 

In  1859  he  left  Weimar  in  irritation  over  the  hostility  shown  to  Cornelius’ 
Barbier , and  in  1861  his  official  place  was  filled  by  Lassen.  He  settled  now 
in  Rome.  His  complex  nature  included  a strong  vein  of  religious  mysticism, 
which  here  became  conspicuous.  At  Weimar  he  had  written  several  masses, 
the  most  celebrated  being  the  Graner  Festmesse  (1855,  for  the  dedication  of 
the  cathedral  at  Gran),  and  3 psalms.  His  union  with  the  Princess,  after 
long  negotiations,  was  disapproved  by  the  Church  and  was  renounced.  He 
pursued  theological  studies  far  enough  to  receive  the  title  of  Abb£  from  the 
Pope  (1866),  and  his  works  now  came  to  include  the  oratorios  St.  Elizabeth 
(1862),  Christus  (1866)  and  Stanislaus  (unfinished),  the  Hungarian  Corona- 
tion Mass  (1867)  and  the  Requiem  (1868),  besides  short  works  for  voices, 
orchestra  or  piano. 

The  Weimar  court  often  indicated  its  good-will,  and  from  1869  Liszt  re- 
sumed life  there  each  spring  and  summer.  In  1870  he  there  conducted  the 
Beethoven  Centenary,  and  in  1884  the  Jubilee  of  the  Allgemeiner  deutscher 
Musikverein.  From  1873  he  was  busy  over  plans  for  a National  Academy  of 
Music  at  Pesth,  of  which  he  became  honorary  president.  Thenceforward 
he  divided  each  year  between  Pesth,  Weimar  and  Rome.  Pupils  continued 
to  flock  to  him.  His  influence  as  a leader  did  not  abate,  nor  his  zeal  for 
Wagner  and  all  fresh  enterprises.  To  his  long  roll  of  compositions  were 
added  the  cantatas  Die  Glocken  (1874),  St.  Cecilia  (1874),  Die  Kreuzesstati- 
onen  (1876),  the  organ-mass  (1879),  the  symphonic  poem  Von  der  Wiege  bis 
zum  Grabe  (1881),  the  last  Hungarian  Rhapsodies,  many  songs  and  choral 
pieces,  etc.  Among  his  later  writings  was  the  essay  on  Franz  (1872).  In 
1886,  full  of  honors,  he  died  at  Bayreuth  while*  attending  a Wagner  festival. 

It  would  be  quite  impossible  to  name  or  trace  all  the  lines  of 
personal  development  that  diverged  from  Weimar  during  its  bril- 
liant period  under  Liszt’s  direction.  It  became  for  a time  an 
artistic  centre  to  which  came  pupils  and  aspirants  of  every 
degree.  But  several  composers  and  writers  deserve  emphasis 
because  of  their  talent  and  later  influence.  Of  these  Raff  was 
chief,  but  there  were  many  others. 

Joseph  Joachim  Raff  (d.  1882),  a Wurttemberger,  born  in  1822,  after  some 
training  became  a school-teacher,  but  with  much  private  study  of  music.  At 
21,  securing  Mendelssohn’s  attention,  he  was  enabled  to  publish  a few  piano- 
pieces,  and  then  devoted  himself  to  composing.  At  23  Liszt  took  him  along 
on  a tour,  but  from  1846  he  settled  at  Cologne  as  composer  and  critic.  His 
hope  to  study  with  Mendelssohn,  to  get  commissions  from  a Vienna  publisher, 


THE  WEIMAR  CIRCLE 


577 


and  to  have  his  opera,  Konig  Alfred,  given  at  Stuttgart,  were  all  disappointed. 
Biilow,  however,  helped  to  introduce  his  works  to  the  public.  From  1850  he 
was  Liszt's  assistant  at  Weimar,  where  his  opera  was  given  (1851)  with  other 
works,  and  where  he  championed  Wagner  and  the  new  ideas  with  his  pen. 
In  1856  he  moved  to  Wiesbaden,  married  the  daughter  of  the  actor  Genast, 
and  became  a favorite  piano-teacher.  In  1863  his  first  symphony  won  in  a 
competition  at  Vienna,  and  in  1870  his  opera  Dame  Kobold  was  given  at 
Weimar.  From  1877  he  was  head  of  the  new  Frankfort  conservatory  founded 
by  Dr.  Hoch.  Raff  was  a prolific  composer  (over  230  works),  often  in  a 
hasty  and  superficial  vein,  but  in  larger  forms  sometimes  showing  much  power. 
The  list  includes  11  symphonies,  such  as  Ini  Walde  (1869)  and  Lenore 
(1872),  4 orchestral  suites,  9 overtures,  a striking  piano-concerto,  a large 
amount  of  chamber  music,  a host  of  piano  works,  several  choral  cantatas, 
church  music,  an  oratorio  (1882),  many  attractive  songs  and  part-songs, 
besides  4 operas  not  given,  etc.  In  spite  of  his  sympathy  with  the  new 
styles,  much  of  his  writing  follows  old  lines,  though  with  decided  novelty  in 
melodic  invention.  He  used  contrapuntal  devices  with  extreme  freedom  and 
grace. 

Peter  Cornelius  (d.  1874),  born  at  Mayence  in  1824,  aimed  first  to  be  an 
actor,  but  at  23,  under  the  care  of  his  uncle,  the  distinguished  painter,  turned 
to  music,  studying  with  Dehn  at  Berlin  and  in  1852  joining  Liszt  at  Weimar. 
Like  Raff,  he  served  Liszt  as  a sort  of  secretary  and  entered  the  field  as  a 
literary  worker.  In  1858  his  opera  Der  Bar  bier  von  Bagdad  failed  because 
of  mean  attacks,  and  he  followed  Wagner  to  Vienna.  In  1865  the  latter  got 
him  a place  in  the  Munich  Music-School.  The  same  year  his  opera  Der  Cid 
was  given  at  Weimar.  His  Guntdd  was  left  incomplete,  but  was  finished  by 
Hoffbauer  and  Lassen  (1892,  Strassburg).  For  these  works  he  wrote  the 
texts  with  poetic  skill,  and  published  poems  besides  (1861).  He  is  also  known 
by  original  songs,  duets  and  part-songs.  His  style  has  kinship  with  Wagner’s, 
though  somewhat  extreme  in  details. 

Hans  yon  Bronsart,  born  at  Berlin  in  1830,  also  came  from  Dehn  to  Liszt 
in  1852.  His  early  success  was  as  a touring  pianist.  In  1860-2  he  led  the 
Euterpe  concerts  at  Leipsic,  in  1865  followed  Biilow  as  conductor  at  Berlin, 
from  1867  was  intendant  and  choirmaster  at  Hanover,  and  from  1887  in  the 
same  posts  at  Weimar,  retiring  in  1895.  His  best-known  works  are  a trio,  a 
piano-concerto,  an  orchestral  Phantasie  and  the  choral  symphony  In  den 
Alpen  (1896),  besides  another  symphony,  a cantata,  piano-pieces  and  an 
unperformed  opera.  His  wife,  Ingeborg  (Starck)  yon  Bronsart,  also  a pupil 
of  Liszt,  is  a fine  pianist  and  the  gifted  writer  of  several  operas  and  many 
piano  works. 

Eduard  Lassen  (d.  1904),  born  at  Copenhagen  in  1830,  was  finely  trained 
at  the  Brussels  conservatory,  winning  many  prizes,  and  from  1851  traveled 
widely  in  Germany  and  Italy.  His  opera  Landgraf  Ludwigs  Brautfahrt  was 
given  at  Weimar  in  1857.  In  1858,  at  Liszt’s  suggestion,  he  was  made  con- 
ductor there,  and  in  1861  succeeded  as  choirmaster,  retiring  in  1895.  He 
wrote  2 other  operas,  Frauenlob  (i860,  Weimar)  and  Le  captif  (1865,  Brussels), 
incidental  music  to  ‘ Oedipos  in  Colonos’  (1874),  ‘Faust’  (1876),  ‘Pandora’ 
(1886),  Hebbel’s  ‘ Nibelungen  ’ and  ‘ Circe,’ 2 symphonies,  several  overtures, 


578 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


cantatas,  Biblische  Bilder , and  highly  successful  songs.  Under  him  Wagner’s 
Tristan  was  produced  in  1874  for  the  first  time  away  from  Munich. 

Leopold  Damrosch  (d.  1885),  born  at  Posen  in  1832,  first  studied  medicine 
at  Berlin,  winning  his  degree  at  22,  but  also  pursued  music  to  such  purpose 
that  he  soon  became  a violin-virtuoso  and  in  1855  was  engaged  at  Weimar  as 
soloist  in  the  court-orchestra.  There  he  married  the  soprano  Helene  von 
Heimburg.  From  1859  he  worked  at  Breslau,  first  as  conductor  of  the  Phil- 
harmonic concerts,  later,  after  tours  with  Biilow  and  Tausig,  as  founder  of  an 
orchestral  society,  chamber  concerts  and  a choral  society,  besides  being  for  a 
time  conductor  at  the  theatre.  Called  to  New  York  in  1871  as  conductor  of 
the  Arion,  he  there  started  the  Oratorio  Society  in  1873  and  the  Symphony 
Society  in  1878,  organized  a large  festival  in  1881  and  conducted  German 
opera  in  1884-5.  He  was  a versatile  and  finished  composer  — a symphony,  3 
violin-concertos,  7 cantatas,  many  songs,  etc.  But  he  was  most  noted  as  an 
organizer  and  as  a zealous  apostle  of  modern  styles. 

Alexander  Ritter  (d.  1896)  was  a German,  though  born  in  Russia  in  1833. 
As  a boy  he  was  Biilow’s  comrade  at  Dresden,  where  he  studied  with  the 
violinist  Schubert.  After  two  years  at  the  Leipsic  conservatory,  he  married  a 
niece  of  Wagner  and  in  1854  joined  the  Weimar  group.  From  1856  he  lived 
mostly  at  Stettin  or  Dresden,  and  in  1863  settled  at  Wurzburg,  where  in  1875 
he  established  a music-store.  From  1882  he  was  in  Biilow’s  orchestra  at 
Meiningen,  and  from  1886  lived  at  Munich.  Though  not  specially  forceful, 
he  was  favorably  known  for  his  symphonic  poems,  2 comic  operas  (1885-90) 
and  good  songs. 

Felix  Draeseke,  born  at  Coburg  in  1835  and  first  trained  at  Leipsic,  though 
younger  than  the  foregoing,  was  prominent  with  them  at  Weimar,  from  1857 
being  an  energetic  champion  in  print  of  the  new  ideas.  From  1864  he  taught 
at  the  Lausanne  conservatory,  with  one  year  (1868-9)  at  Munich,  and  in  1876 
moved  to  Dresden,  where  since  1884  he  has  been  a leading  professor  in  the 
conservatory.  His  compositions,  in  modern  vein,  include  3 symphonies,  3 
overtures,  concertos  for  piano  and  for  violin,  much  chamber  music,  several 
cantatas,  striking  church  music,  an  oratorio,  4 operas  (from  1867),  etc.,  be- 
sides theoretical  works  (from  1879). 

Among  literary  workers  more  or  less  connected  with  the  Weimar  group 
were  the  court-official  Franz  Muller  (d.  1876),  an  early  supporter  of  Wagner 
in  many  essays  (1853-69)  ; the  abundant  historical  writer  Reissmann  (d. 
1903),  whose  talent  for  authorship  was  awakened  here  in  1850-2;  and  the 
influential  editors  of  the  Neue  Zeitschrift , Franz  Brendel  (d.  1868)  and  Richard 
Pohl  (d.  1896). 

Among  the  greater  pianists  who  went  forth  from  Liszt  imbued  with  modern 
enthusiasms  were  Rudolf  Viole  of  Berlin  (d.  1867),  Biilow  (d.  1894),  Klind- 
worth  of  London,  Moscow  and  Berlin,  Pflughaupt  of  Aix  (d.  1871),  Julius 
Reubke  (d.  1858),  Pruckner  of  Stuttgart  (d.  1896),  Winterberger  of  Vienna,  St. 
Petersburg  and  Leipsic,  Theodor  Ratzenberger  of  Diisseldorf  (d.  1879),  the 
brilliant  Karl  Tausig  (d.  1871),  and  many  others  later. 

Here  may  well  be  added  some  details  about  the  personnel  of  the 
Weimar  kapelle.  The  court-choirmasters  during  the  century  included 


THE  WEIMAR  CIRCLE 


579 


from  1 8 io  A.  E.  Muller  (d.  1817)  ; from  1819  the  pianist  Hummel  (d. 
1837)  ; in  1836-50  the  French  opera-writer  Chelard  (d.  1861)  ; in  1849- 
61  Liszt  (d.  1886)  ; from  1857  for  a short  time  KarlStor  (d.  1889),  who 
had  been  in  court  employ  since  1827;  in  1861-95  the  Dane-Belgian 
Lassen  (d.  1904);  in  1889-94  also  Richard  Strauss  ; in  1895  Eugen 
d' Albert;  and  in  1895-8  Bernhard  Stavenhagen.  Among  the  concert- 
masters  were  in  1849-52  the  great  Joachim  (d.  1907),  who  did  not  agree 
with  Liszt's  radicalism  ; in  1853-5  Laub  ( d.  1875)  ? in  1854-61  Edmund 
Singer,  later  of  Stuttgart ; in  1863-84  August  Kompel  (d.  1891);  besides 
the  soloists  in  1855-8  Leopold  Damrosch  (d.  1885)  and  in  1862-72  Isidor 
Lotto , later  of  Strassburg.  Other  violinists  of  note  were  from  1803  Karl 
Eberwein  (d.  1868)  ; in  1826-48  Johann  Nikolaus  Konrad  Gotze  (d. 
1861)  ; and  in  1853 -67  Ludwig  Abel  (d.  1895).  In  1812-42  the  theorist 
J.  C.  Lobe  (d.  1881)  was  flutist  and  later  violist.  Among  the  ’cellists 
were  in  1850-66  Bernhard  Cossmann , later  of  Frankfort;  from  1870  for 
a time  Ernest  Demunck,  later  of  London  ; in  c.  1871-85  Eduard  Jacobs , 
later  of  Brussels  ; and  from  1876  Leopold  Griltzmacher  (d.  1900). 

From  1830  the  town-organist  was  the  learned  expert  Johann  Gottlob 
Topfer  (d.  1870),  who  was  followed  in  1870  by  Alexander  Wilhelm 
Gottschalg. 

In  Liszt’s  time  there  was  a close  connection  between  Weimar  and  Son- 
dershausen  (35  m.  northwest).  The  orchestra  there,  developed  under 
previous  choirmasters,  as  from  1800  Johann  Simon  Hermstedt  (d.  1846) 
and  in  1844-52  Gottfried  Herrmann  (d.  1878),  from  1853  advanced 
to  great  perfection  under  Eduard  Stem  (d.  1864),  one  of  Liszt’s  inti- 
mates— an  eminence  fully  maintained  later,  in  1867-70  by  Max  Bruch , 
in  1871-80  by  Max  Erdtnannsdorfer , and  in  1881-86  by  Karl  Schroder. 
(It  was  here  that  the  noted  Schroder  quartet  was  formed  in  1871.) 


CHAPTER  XXXV 


SYMPHONISTS  AND  INSTRUMENTALISTS 

211.  Competing  Orchestral  Ideals.  — The  middle  of  the  cen- 
tury was  a time  of  transition  in  every  department  of  composi- 
tion. The  divergences  of  ideal  were  specially  conspicuous  in  or- 
chestral music,  partly  because  of  the  close  interrelation  of  such 
music  with  dramatic  music. 

A considerable  number  of  composers  adhered  in  general  to 
the  forms  and  the  ways  of  the  classical  style,  with  its  emphasis 
upon  tonal  design  and  formal  development.  The  romantic 
craving  for  picturesqueness  or  for  the  warmly  personal  touch 
led  constantly  toward  modifications  of  the  strict  classical  patterns 
of  structure,  but  with  no  deliberate  intention  in  this  group  to 
set  them  aside.  Spohr  is  one  typical  illustration  here.  Men- 
delssohn is  another,  with  greater  flexibility  and  animation.  And 
there  were  numerous  lesser  writers  who  may  be  counted  as 
essentially  classicists. 

The  more  positive  romanticist  Schumann  theoretically  went 
further  than  any  of  the  foregoing  group  in  the  effort  to  find  out- 
let for  subjectivity  and  a new  range  of  imagination.  But 
Schumann  himself  was  hampered  by  his  imperfect  knowledge 
of  the  technique  of  instrumentation.  And  the  full  influence  of 
his  style  was  delayed  until  a later  point. 

Over  against  all  these  stood  the  class  of  deliberate  innovators 
in  technical  method.  Wagner  and  the  many  who  came  to  be 
affiliated  with  him  aimed  to  reconstruct  style  on  the  basis  of  a 
new  view  of  the  nature  and  function  of  melody.  The  classical 
type  of  melody  came  from  folk-music,  and  from  such  music 
came  also  a tendency  to  adopt  compact  and  highly  symmetrical 
forms  of  development.  The  new  type,  so  far  as  it  had  any 
vocal  prototype,  came  from  far  more  sentimentalized  and  impas- 
sioned song-patterns  or  from  free  dramatic  declamation.  And 
the  treatment  of  materials  departed  widely  from  the  conventional 
etiquette  of  the  classical  period,  in  some  respects  recalling 

580 


ORCHESTRAL  TENDENCIES 


58 


the  imperial  freedom  of  Bach.  Division  into  distinct  move- 
ments was  less  obligatory,  and  within  movements  the  old  rigidity 
of  plan  was  more  and  more  thrown  aside.  Development  was 
determined  by  impulse  or  some  dramatic  plan  rather  than  by 
the  fixed  regimen  of  sonata-form.  Although  Wagner  was 
probably  the  most  original  thinker  in  this  new  movement, 
Liszt  became  its  most  conspicuous  leader.  It  was  on  the  basis 
of  the  latter’s  work  that  the  ‘ New-German  ’ school  rested. 

But  closely  connected  with  the  whole  work  of  Wagner  and 
Liszt  was  another  tendency,  essentially  radical  in  nature,  though 
unable  to  proceed  alone.  This  was  the  movement  of  the 
so-called  * colorists  ’ or  impressionists.  Here  the  Frenchman 
Berlioz  was  an  energetic  leader.  His  style  was  evolved  from 
a novel  regard  for  the  expressive  capacity  of  tone-qualities  or 
timbres  as  compared  with  that  of  tone-patterns.  Berlioz  him- 
self was  not  eminent  in  melodic  or  harmonic  invention,  but  he 
had  a remarkable  instinct  in  perceiving  and  utilizing  the  powers 
of  orchestral  instruments.  He  was  emphatically  an  orchestral 
virtuoso,  with  the  virtuoso’s  desire  to  exploit  effects.  His  ex- 
periments naturally  reacted  upon  general  style.  But  in  music, 
as  in  pictorial  art,  color-effects  can  never  be  divorced  from 
effects  of  outline  and  plan.  Hence  the  orchestral  colorists 
and  the  dramatists  drew  together,  each  group  deriving  some- 
thing from  the  other. 

The  term  ‘program-music1  is  constantly  applied  to  most  of  Berlioz1 
work  and  much  of  Liszt’s,  since  they  often  directed  the  hearer’s  mind  by 
verbal  titles,  mottoes  or  ‘arguments,1  and  even  strove  to  depict  the 
sequence  of  physical  facts  by  tonal  means.  This  entire  line  of  effort  has 
been  the  topic  of  endless  debate  — perhaps  unnecessarily.  Music,  being 
a progressive  or  discursive  art,  must  pursue  some  plan  or  program  of 
procedure.  This  plan  may  be  one  of  tonal  patterns  and  dispositions,  as 
in  the  older  polyphony  and  in  all  classical  writing;  or  of  dramatic 
characters  and  events,  as  in  the  opera  and  the  oratorio ; or  of  personal 
sentiments,  however  occasioned,  as  in  the  song  or  ballade ; or  of  any- 
thing else  where  there  is  a distinct  process  or  flux  of  thought  and  feeling. 
That  this  process  or  flux  may  be  associated  with  concrete  images,  such  as 
may  also  be  embodied  to  some  extent  in  words,  action  or  pictures,  is 
abundantly  shown  by  all  music  with  a continuous  verbal  text.  The  only 
question  is  whether  textless  music  for  instruments  is  essentially  hampered 
or  distorted  by  having  the  definite  direction  of  a verbal  title  or  other 
intellectual  annotation.  It  is  certainly  true  that  any  attempt  to  restrict 
music  to  those  processes  of  thought  that  can  be  thus  definitely  described 


582 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


in  words  must  break  down  utterly.  Artistic  music  must  always  have 
interest  and  value  over  and  above  that  which  inheres  in  any  text,  title  or 
argument  — the  hearer,  however,  being  free  to  supply  some  imaginary  in- 
terpretation of  the  tonal  formulation  of  feeling  which  he  hears.  But 
there  would  seem  to  be  no  essential  impropriety  in  the  composer’s  having 
in  his  work  some  definite  mental  impulse  or  in  his  communicating  this  to 
the  hearer.  Hence  the  use  of  the  ‘ program  ’ idea  seems  to  be  legitimate. 
It  is  the  abuse  of  it  by  the  selection  of  unsuitable  topics  or  by  making 
some  extreme  statement  of  it  normative  of  all  musical  art  that  is  to  be 
resisted. 

The  one  special  form  of  composition  that  arose  in  this  transitional 
period  was  the  ‘symphonic  poem,’  the  invention  of  which  is  usually 
ascribed  to  Liszt.  This  form  cannot  be  precisely  defined  as  can  the 
forms  of  classical  style.  It  was  not  governed  by  what  may  be  called 
architectonic  rules.  In  essence  it  was  dramatic,  and  hence  its  building 
up  was  analogous,  not  to  the  processes  of  physical  manufacture  or  formal 
logic,  but  to  those  of  free  social  activity.  Its  materials  were  themes 
symbolizing  personages,  situations  or  ideas.  These  themes,  with  their 
pictorial  or  emotional  suggestiveness,  were,  so  to  speak,  put  into  action 
and  made  to  deploy  as  actors  on  a stage.  The  interest,  as  in  a drama, 
depended  on  the  interplay  of  contrasted  elements,  on  the  transforma- 
tion of  the  factors  under  changing  conditions,  on  the  on-go  of  events 
toward  a denouement.  Of  course,  the  way  in  which  this  dramatic  unfold- 
ing was  wrought  out  varied  indefinitely  with  the  nature  of  the  topic 
chosen  and  the  angle  of  feeling  whence  it  was  approached.  Liszt’s  suc- 
cess with  this  form  was  due  to  his  ready  absorption  of  artistic  ideas  from 
Berlioz  on  the  one  hand  and  Wagner  on  the  other.  Since  his  day  the 
symphonic  poem  or  something  akin  to  it  has  been  a recognized  form  of 
orchestral  composition,  and  its  acceptance  has  enriched  the  whole  field 
of  instrumental  art. 

Under  the  influence  of  these  new  tendencies  the  strict  regularity  of  the 
classical  symphony  tended  to  vanish.  The  number,  order  and  character 
of  movements  became  somewhat  variable,  and  their  internal  structure 
began  to  show  wide  freedom.  All  this  was  the  natural  result  of  the  new 
ideas  about  form  in  relation  to  expression  which  began  with  Beethoven. 

212.  The  Work  of  Berlioz.  — The  duration  of  Berlioz’  artistic 
career  falls  almost  exactly  into  the  period  here  being  discussed. 
Its  beginning  was  coincident  with  the  early  work  of  Mendelssohn, 
Schumann,  Chopin,  Liszt  and  Wagner.  But  it  started  amid  the 
peculiarly  academic  conditions  of  Paris,  and  it  proceeded  at  first 
without  close  connection  with  the  strong  German  development. 
Berlioz  was  instinctively  revolutionary  in  impulse.  His  in- 
dependence and  the  severity  with  which  he  expressed  himself 
prevented  his  holding  intimate  relations  with  other  musicians. 
He  was  intensely  ambitious  for  recognition  and  sought  eagerly 


BERLIOZ 


583 


to  make  his  works  known.  He  turned  restlessly  from  one  form 
of  composition  to  another,  tending  always  to  adopt  bizarre  and 
extravagant  projects,  usually  involving  an  unwieldy  apparatus 
of  performance.  Amid  his  audacities  there  were  times  when  he 
came  close  to  sublimity  and  also  when  he  displayed  extreme 
lyric  beauty,  but  on  the  whole  his  creative  powers  were  unequal 
to  the  tasks  he  put  upon  them.  Nevertheless,  the  vigor  of  his 
artistic;  ambition  could  not  be  overlooked,  and  his  special  studies 
in  all  details  of  instrumentation  made  him  an  authority.  His 
historical  importance,  then,  lies  not  so  much  in  his  philosophy 
of  musical  art,  or  in  his  absolute  contributions  to  musical  litera- 
ture, as  in  the  stimulus  he  gave  to  the  study  of  musical  ways 
and  means.  The  fact  that  he  came  just  when  he  did  was  of 
importance  in  furthering  the  movements  of  which  Wagner  and 
Liszt  were  the  leaders.  And  the  circumstance  of  the  war  be- 
tween France  and  Germany  just  after  his  death  favored  the 
consideration  of  his  works  by  his  countrymen  when  anything 
bearing  the  German  stamp  would  have  been  distasteful. 

Hector  Berlioz  (d.  1869),  born  in  1803  not  far  from  Lyons,  was  the  son  of 
an  able  doctor  who  finally  sent  him  to  Paris  as  a medical  student.  In  youth 
he  learned  the  flute  and  guitar,  but  at  Paris  from  1822  he  embarked  upon 
general  musical  study,  though  involving  a break  with  his  father.  At  the 
Conservatoire  he  had  courses  with  Reicha  and  Le  Sueur,  supporting  himself 
by  singing  in  a theatre-chorus  until  at  length  his  father’s  favor  was  regained. 
As  early  as  1825  he  essayed  work  in  the  largest  forms  — a Messe  solennelle 
with  orchestra  (given  at  St.  Roch  and  in  1827  at  St.  Eustache),  an  oratorio, 
an  opera,  etc.  Two  overtures  followed,  including  that  to  Waver  ley,  which, 
with  a Seine  heroique  grecque,  were  given  at  the  Conservatoire  (1826)  — the 
first  of  five  attempts  to  win  the  Prix  de  Rome.  In  spite  of  Cherubini’s  oppo- 
sition, success  came  in  1830  with  the  cantata  Sardanapale.  Before  this  he 
had  written  most  of  the  ‘symphonie  fantastique,’  Episode  de  la  vie  d'un 
artiste  (1829),  and  some  fragments  later  used  in  other  works.  Unhappy  at 
Rome  and  Naples,  he  secured  leave  to  return  after  only  a year  and  a half, 
bringing  the  monodrama  Lelio , the  overtures  to  King  Lear  and  Rob  Roy , the 
scena  La  captive  and  sketches  of  the  overture  Le  corsaire.  In  1833  he 
married  the  Irish  actress  Henrietta  Smithson  (they  separated  in  1840). 
Already  well  known  as  a ready  writer,  from  1834  he  was  on  the  staff  of  the 
new  Revue  et  gazette  musicale  and  for  many  years  remained  noted  as  one  of 
the  most  brilliant  of  Parisian  critics  (essays  collected  1853-63).  His  greater 
compositions  during  these  years  were  the  symphony  Harold  e?i  Italie  (1834), 
the  Messe  des  ?norts  (1837),  the  grand  opera  Benvenuto  Cellini  (1838),  which 
was  not  popularly  successful,  the  dramatic  symphony  Romeo  et  Juliette  (1839) 
and  the  Sy7nphonie  funebre  et  trio?nphale  (1840),  besides  several  cantatas  and 


584 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


songs.  From  1839  he  came  into  the  Conservatoire  circle  as  librarian,  but  was 
never  professor. 

The  attention  of  German  critics  had  long  been  arrested  by  the  novelty  of 
Berlioz’  efforts,  and  his  overtures  had  begun  to  be  heard.  So  in  1842-3,  when 
he  made  a grand  tour  through  Germany  as  far  as  Berlin  and  Hamburg,  he 
was  a much-heralded  personage.  By  Liszt  and  the  Weimar  circle  he  was 
specially  honored,  and  his  general  reception  was  flattering.  The  result  was 
a marked  change  in  his  standing  at  Paris.  In  1845  he  gave  concerts  at 
Marseilles,  Lyons  and  Lille,  and  also  made  a tour  to  Vienna,  Pesth,  Prague 
and  Breslau.  In  1847  he  visited  Russia  with  success.  He  was  mentioned  as 
a possible  associate  with  Girard  as  conductor  of  the  Op^ra.  In.  1852  he  con- 
ducted the  New  Philharmonic  concerts  in  London,  from  1853  often  led  the 
Baden-Baden  orchestra,  and  in  1866-7  made  trips  to  Vienna  and  St.  Peters- 
burg. From  1851  he  was  several  times  on  the  juries  of  Expositions  at  Paris 
or  London,  and  in  1856  became  an  Academician.  His  later  compositions 
included  the  dramatic  legend  La  damnation  de  Faust  (1846),  a Te  Deum  for 
three  choirs  (1849),  the  trilogy  Lenfance  du  Christ  (1852-4),  the  op^ra 
comique  Beatrice  et  Benedict  (1862),  and  the  grand  opera  Les  Troyens  (two 
parts,  1858-63).  Of  his  first  German  tour  he  wrote  a long  account  (1844). 
His  monumental  work  on  instrumentation  was  issued  in  1843  (later  aug- 
mented). He  left  an  autobiography  (1870)  of  exceptional  interest.  Many 
of  his  letters  have  been  published  (by  Bernard,  1879,  and  hy  Gounod,  1882). 
Among  his  writings  were  the  poetic  texts  for  L'enfance  du  Christ  and  his 
last  two  operas. 

Berlioz  made  exhaustive  studies  of  the  technical  capacities  of  all  classes 
of  orchestral  instruments.  He  was  able  to  suggest  many  extensions  in  the 
range  of  their  ordinary  use.  He  had  a marvelous  perception  of  the  emotional 
and  pictorial  effects  most  germane  to  each.  He  was  ingenious  in  mak- 
ing unheard-of  combinations  for  special  purposes.  In  his  larger  works  he 
delighted  in  massing  together  enormous  groups  of  a single  kind  (as,  for 
example,  14  timpani  in  the  Requiem),  or  combining  prodigious  complexes  of 
instruments  and  voices  (his  ideal  orchestra  would  have  included  over  400 
players,  assisted  by  a vast  chorus  and  the  largest  organ).  These  sensational 
means  were  desired  not  merely  for  overwhelming  effects  of  loudness,  but  for 
indescribable  richness  of  tone-color  even  in  delicate  passages. 

So  far  as  direct  influence  went,  Berlioz*  ideas  were  most 
immediately  effective  as  they  were  incorporated  into  the  styles 
of  Liszt  and  Wagner.  In  France  his  precepts  and  example 
became  in  time  profoundly  stimulating,  but  their  effect  was  not 
widely  felt  until  after  his  death.  The  modern  French  interest 
in  orchestral  writing,  apart  from  the  opera,  developed  slowly. 
It  has  always  had  a dramatic  cast.  Berlioz’  influence  upon  it 
has  mainly  affected  the  technique  of  orchestration  rather  than 
the  elements  of  construction.  His  successors  have  abundantly 
supplied  the  elements  in  which  he  was  deficient. 


FRENCH  SYMPHONISTS 


585 


Johann  Georg  Kastner  (d.  1867)  worked  side  bv  side  with  Berlioz  in  minute 
study  of  the  technique  of  instrumentation.  Born  at  Strassburg  in  1810,  he 
was  a precocious  organist,  and,  after  studying  theology  for  a time,  brought 
out  4 German  operas  (1832-5).  Going  then  to  Paris  for  further  study,  besides 
writing  4 French  operas,  including  the  noteworthy  Le  dernier  roi  de  Juda 
(1844),  he  prepared  a long  and  careful  series  of  didactic  methods,  mostly  for 
instruments,  beginning  with  a general  treatise  (1837).  He  was  much  in- 
terested in  developing  the  military  band  and  in  building  up  choral  societies. 
His  zeal  for  enlarging  popular  knowledge  was  shown  in  6 elaborate  symphony- 
cantatas  with  long  historical  and  explanatory  introductions  (1852-62).  His 
instrumental  works  included  3 symphonies,  5 overtures,  10  serenades  for  wind 
instruments,  a saxophone-sextet,  etc.,  but  his  style,  unlike  that  of  Berlioz,  was 
not  at  all  radical. 

Among  the  few  French  composers  at  work  upon  purely  orchestral  writing 
were  the  opera-writer  and  theorist  N.  H.  Reber  (d.  1880),  with  4 symphonies, 
an  overture,  a suite,  the  scenes  lyriques  Roland  and  many  refined  chamber 
works  ; the  poetic  orientalist  FSlicien  David  (d.  1876),  whose  first  symphony 
(1838)  was  followed  by  the  notable  orchestral  ode  Le  desert  (1844),  a second 
ode  Christophe  Colomb  (1847)  and  the  ‘mystery’  VEden  (1848)  — all  partly 
vocal ; the  able  pianist  Louis  Lacombe  (d.  1884),  with  2 dramatic  symphonies, 
Manfred  (1847)  and  Arva  (1850),  besides  many  piano  works;  and  Camille 
Saint-Saens,  who,  though  entering  the  field  as  early  as  1851,  belongs  among 
the  host  of  younger  men,  like  Theodore  Dubois  and  Jules  Massenet,  with  the 
older  C6sar  Franck  (d.  1890),  who  led  onward  toward  the  modern  school  of 
French  writing  (see  sec.  231). 

Here  we  may  recall  that  the  founder  of  the  Conservatoire  concerts  in  1806, 
with  their  obvious  influence  upon  instrumental  music,  was  Francis  Antoine 
Habeneck  (d.  1849),  who  from  1826  was  also  conductor  at  the  Op^ra.  In 
succession  after  him,  usually  in  both  offices,  were  from  1846  Narcisse  Girard 
(d.  i860);  in  1860-3  Theophile  Tilmant  (d.  1878);  from  1863  Francis 
Georges  Hainl  (d.  1873)  i and  in  1873-85  Edouard  Marie  Ernest  Deldevez 
(d.  1897).  None  of  these,  except  the  last,  was  specially  known  as  a com- 
poser. Another  influential  conductor  was  Jules  Etienne  Pasdeloup  (d.  1887), 
who  started  important  symphony  concerts  in  1851. 

213.  Some  Conservative  Leaders.  — Against  what  they  felt  to 
be  the  technically  demoralizing  tendencies  of  the  Liszt-Wagner 
movement  in  instrumentalism,  stood  several  conservative  groups. 
They  were  not  closely  united,  and  had  no  single  centre  around 
which  they  could  rally.  A few,  like  Lachner,  derived  pre- 
possessions direct  from  the  Viennese  classicists  at  the  opening 
of  the  century.  Many,  like  Taubert  and  Kiel,  were  drawn  into 
the  peculiarly  reactionary  atmosphere  of  Berlin,  with  its  neglect 
of  instrumental  work  and  its  prejudice  against  even  the  mild 
romanticism  of  the  Saxon  circle.  Many  more,  not  only  in  Ger- 
many, but  beyond,  in  Scandinavia,  Holland  and  England,  were 


586 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


guided  by  the  powerful  influence  of  the  Leipsic  conservatory, 
with  its  exaltation  of  elegance,  symmetry  and  dignity,  sometimes 
to  the  discouragement  of  warmth  and  spontaneity.  Only  a few, 
like  Volkmann  and  Brahms,  came  early  into  the  more  strenuous 
and  progressive  succession  to  Schumann  and  were  thus  ready 
to  make  some  combination  of  intricate  classical  texture  with  the 
expression  of  a wider  range  of  feeling  and  ideas.  It  is  slightly 
noticeable  that  in  this  last  group  valuable  impetus  was  received 
from  the  source  that  was  fruitful  in  the  case  of  masters  as 
dissimilar  as  Haydn  and  Liszt,  namely,  the  national  music  of 
Hungary.  Somewhat  analogous  interminglings  of  older  tech- 
nical methods  with  fresh  national  or  racial  materials  and  sen- 
timents were  to  be  seen  in  still  other  cases,  Russian  and 
Scandinavian. 

Without  attempting  the  difficult  task  of  a full  classification,  several  promi- 
nent composers  are  here  grouped  together  who  on  the  whole  opposed  the 
transformations  of  style  advocated  by  the  ‘ New-German’  enthusiasts. 

Franz  Lachner  (d.  1890),  a Bavarian,  born  in  1803,  had  training  from  Ett 
at  Munich  and  from  Stadler  and  Sechter  at  Vienna,  where  he  was  one  of 
Beethoven’s  later  friends  and  also  prominent  among  the  1 Schubertiaden.’ 
There  in  1826  he  became  conductor  at  the  Karnthnerthor  Theatre,  and  started 
the  Philharmonic  concerts.  After  two  years'  at  Mannheim,  in  1836  he  was 
made  court-conductor  at  Munich,  where  for  over  30  years  he  was  a distin- 
guished force.  From  1865  he  gradually  withdrew  from  activity  because  of 
his  distaste  for  the  Wagnerian  movement.  His  works  include  8 strong 
symphonies,  8 brilliant  orchestral  suites,  several  overtures  and  much  chamber 
music,  besides  organ  and  vocal  works,  church  music,  2 oratorios  and  4 operas 
(1828-49).  His  style  is  full  of  solid  learning  and  contrapuntal  ingenuity. 
Personally  he  was  greatly  esteemed  throughout  southern  Germany.  His 
brother  Ignaz  Lachner  (d.  1895)  was  likewise  industrious  and  worthy,  serving 
as  conductor  at  Vienna,  Stuttgart,  Munich,  Hamburg,  Stockholm  and  Frankfort 
till  1875. 

The  musical  eminence  of  Munich  in  the  modern  period  dates  almost 
wholly  from  the  accession  of  Ludwig  II.  in  1864.  Early  in  the  century 
the  choirmasters  were  the  opera-writer  Winter  (d.  1825)  and  Ferdinand 
Franzl  (d.  1833).  Winter  was  followed  by  his  pupil  Joseph  Hartmann 
Stuntz  (d.  1859),  but  his  influence  was  slight.  After  Lachner  came  in 
1864-5  Wagner  (d.  1883);  in  1867-9  Billow  (d.  1894);  in  1870-7 
Franz  Wiillner  (d.  1902)  ; in  1872-94  Hermann  Levi  (d.  1900)  ; from 
1877  Joseph  Rheinberger  (d.  1901);  in  1894-7  Richard  Strauss;  in 
1897-8  Max  Erdmannsdbrfer ; in  1898-1900  Bernhard  Stavenhagen , 
and  from  1900  Hermann  Zumpe  (d.  1903).  The  Royal  Music  School, 
founded  in  1846  by  Franz  Hauser  (d.  1870)  and  directed  by  him  till 
1864,  was  radically  reorganized  in  1867  under  Billow. 


CONSERVATIVE  INFLUENCES 


587 


Wilhelm  Taubert  (d.  1891)  was  born  at  Berlin  in  1811  and  spent  his  whole 
life  there,  first  as  pianist  and  teacher,  from  1831  as  court-accompanist,  in 
1842-69  as  court-conductor  (choirmaster  from  1845),  and  after  that  as  head 
of  the  musical  division  of  the  Akademie.  He  was  intimate  with  Mendelssohn 
and  belonged  to  the  same  general  group,  emphasizing  as  conductor  a strict 
conservatism.  His  works  include  4 symphonies  (1831-55),  3 overtures, 
chamber  music,  6 operas  (1832-74)  and  successful  incidental  music  to  plays 
(till  1891).  (See  also  sec.  205.) 

Karl  Gradener  (d.  1883),  born  in  1812  at  Rostock,  beginning  as  a ’cellist  at 
Helsingfors,  was  in  1841-51  musical  director  at  Kiel  University,  and  then, 
except  for  3 years  (1862-5)  at  the  Vienna  conservatory,  prominent  at 
Hamburg.  Best  known  by  his  able  choral  works  and  by  piano-pieces  after 
the  manner  of  Schumann,  he  also  wrote  2 symphonies,  a piano-concerto  and 
much  chamber  music,  including  fine  violin-  and  ’cello-sonatas,  with  a keen  sense 
of  form  and  harmonic  richness. 

Theodore  Gouvy  (d.  1898),  though  of  French  descent  and  from  1846  living 
much  at  Paris,  belonged  with  the  milder  romanticists  and  his  works  received 
special  attention  in  Germany.  They  include  7 symphonies,  2 overtures,  a 
variety  of  chamber  pieces,  2 masses,  6 effective  dramatic  scenas  and  the  opera 
Der  Cid  (1863,  accepted  at  Dresden,  but  not  given),  besides  lesser  works  for 
the  piano  or  the  voice. 

Friedrich  Kiel  (d.  1885),  born  in  Rhenish  Prussia  in  1821,  was  at  first  self- 
taught,  but  later  studied  with  Kummer  and  Dehn.  His  coming  to  Berlin  in 
1844  distinctly  furthered  the  cause  of  instrumental  music,  though  his  eminence 
was  not  fully  recognized  until  after  i860.  From  1866  he  taught  at  the  Stern 
conservatory,  later  at  the  Hochschule.  His  many  chamber  works,  with  his 
better-known  choral  ones,  display  a dignified  command  of  the  technique  of 
construction  in  a style  akin  to  that  of  the  Leipsic  masters  and  not  without 
warmth. 

The  direct  impress  of  the  Leipsic  circle  upon  that  of  Berlin  was  strength- 
ened by  Richard  Wiierst  (d.  1881),  from  1846  a teacher  in  Kullak’s  Academy 
and  later  a prominent  critic,  with  2 symphonies,  overtures,  a violin-concerto, 
quartets,  6 operas,  including  A-ing-fo-hi  (1875);  and  still  more  by  Bargiel 
(d.  1897),  the  step-brother  of  Mme.  Schumann,  who  began  teaching  at  Berlin, 
thence  went  to  Cologne  and  Amsterdam,  and  in  1874  returned  to  Berlin, 
where,  as  a striking  exemplar  of  the  Schumann  traditions,  he  became  highly 
regarded  (see  sec.  191 ).  The  subsequently  famous  Albert  Becker  (d.  1899), 
born  in  1834  and  trained  by  Dehn,  began  teaching  at  Berlin  in  1856,  entering 
the  field  of  composition  about  i860,  most  notably  in  sacred  music.  The 
Silesian  Eduard  Franck  (d.  1893),  trained  at  Breslau  and  for  many  years  at 
Cologne  and  Berne,  came  to  Berlin  in  1867,  first  in  the  Stern  conservatory, 
then  at  Breslaur’s.  The  older  Ludwig  Meinardus  (d.  1896),  a pupil  at 
Leipsic  and  for  a time  of  Liszt,  as  well  as  of  Marx,  after  serving  as  chorus- 
leader  at  Glogau  from  1853,  as  teacher  at  the  Dresden  conservatory  from  1865 
and  as  critic  at  Hamburg  from  1874,  spent  his  last  years  at  Bielefeld.  He  is 
notable  as  one  of  the  few  pupils  of  Liszt  who  remained  a strong  conservative. 
Though  best  known  for  his  choral  works  and  his  critical  writings,  he  also 
wrote  2 symphonies  and  much  chamber  music. 


5 88 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


Among  the  Dutch  and  Belgian  leaders  of  this  period,  many  of  them 
trained  at  Leipsic,  may  be  emphasized  Jean  Verhulst  (d.  1891),  a pupil  of 
Mendelssohn,  from  1842  royal  conductor  at  The  Hague,  from  1848  also  at 
Rotterdam,  and  the  organizer  of  many  popular  festivals,  with  a symphony,  3 
overtures  and  3 quartets,  besides  sacred  works;  Anton  Berlijn  (d.  1870), 
long  conductor  at  Amsterdam,  with  many  orchestral  and  chamber  works; 
Hubert  Ferdinand  Kufferath  (d.  1896),  from  1844  for  a half-century  influential 
at  Brussels  as  conductor  and  pianist,  with  some  symphonies ; the  Belgian 
Adolphe  Samuel  (d.  1898),  in  1865  the  projector  of  popular  concerts  at 
Brussels,  and  from  1871  head  of  the  Ghent  conservatory,  with  7 symphonies, 
many  overtures  and  quartets,  and  5 operas  (1845-52);  and  the  many- 
sided  Richard  Hoi  (d.  1904),  from  about  1850  at  work  at  Amsterdam  and 
from  1862  town-musician  at  Utrecht,  besides  serving  as  conductor  at  The 
Hague,  with  varied  strongly  romantic  instrumental  and  vocal  works. 

In  Denmark  the  Nestor  among  musicians  was  Emil  Hartmann  (d.  1900), 
born  in  1805,  the  son  and  pupil  of  a Copenhagen  organist,  whose  musical 
productiveness  began  about  1825  and  lasted  a full  70  years.  From  1849  he 
was  court-conductor.  Gade  married  his  eldest  daughter  and  the  two  com- 
posers were  always  associated.  He  was  an  admirer  of  Spohr  and  in  his 
younger  days  wrote  symphonies,  overtures  and  chamber  music  in  regular 
form,  though  his  mature  genius  was  better  shown  in  4 operas  (1832-46)  and 
smaller  works  for  the  piano  or  the  voice.  Niels  Wilhelm  Gade  (d.  1890), 
born  in  1817,  became  the  noted  link  between  Leipsic  and  Copenhagen,  where 
he  worked  from  1848.  His  style  reflected  that  of  Mendelssohn  at  first,  later 
that  of  Schumann,  but  with  original  Scandinavian  freshness  of  his  own  (see 
secs.  195-196).  Another  link  with  Leipsic  was  Erik  Siboni  (d.  1892),  at  work 
in  Copenhagen  from  1853  and  teacher  at  Soro  from  1864,  with  2 symphonies, 
an  overture  and  some  chamber  pieces,  besides  choral  works  and  an  opera 
(1862).  The  new  Scandinavian  movement  in  instrumental  music  began  with 
the  Norwegian  Edvard  Hagerup  Grieg  (d.  1907),  born  in  1843,  whose  work 
belongs  wholly  to  the  recent  period  (see  sec.  232). 

214.  Liberal  Tendencies  in  Austria  and  Russia.  — While  the 

whole  of  northern  Germany  was  largely  controlled  by  deliberate 
conservatism,  either  of  the  moderate  Leipsic  type  or  of  the 
more  severe  Berlin  variety,  in  Austria,  Bohemia  and  Hungary, 
also  in  Russia,  there  was  a far  greater  readiness  not  only  to 
throw  instrumental  music  into  the  foreground,  but  to  handle 
its  forms  and  styles  with  freedom.  Within  the  general  circle  of 
which  Vienna  is  the  centre  orchestral  music  had  been  cultivated 
with  fine  constructive  instinct  for  nearly  a century.  Prox- 
imity to  the  folk-music  of  the  Czechs  and  the  Magyars  seemed 
to  yield  a persistent  stimulus.  At  all  events,  in  this  quarter 
appeared  some  of  the  promptest  illustrations  of  how  the  sterling 
constructive  vigor  of  classical  and  post-classical  composers  could 


LIBERAL  INFLUENCES 


589 


be  combined  with  fresh  thematic  materials,  elastically  disposed 
for  emotional  or  dramatic  effect,  and  with  sympathetic  use  of 
the  modern  studies  in  instrumentation.  A few  of  the  leading 
writers  took  their  impetus  from  the  intellectualism  of  Schumann, 
but  more  were  susceptible  to  the  sensational  style  of  Liszt 
and  Berlioz.  In  Russia  a pronounced  national  type  of  composi- 
tion began  to  take  shape,  deriving  some  outlines  from  German 
sources,  but  more  and  more  tending  to  devise  its  own  path 
in  accord  with  the  Slavic  temperament  and  traditions.  This  Rus- 
sian movement  almost  from  the  start  had  a clear  analogy  with 
the  efforts  of  Wagner  and  the  ‘ New-Germans.’ 

As  in  the  preceding  section,  no  attempt  is  made  to  classify  the  names 
selected  beyond  arranging  them  approximately  in  the  order  of  appearance. 

Two  early  Bohemian  composers  on  classical  lines  were  Wenzel  Heinrich  Veit 
(d.  1864),  a civil  official  at  Leitmeritz,  self-taught,  but  expert,  with  a sym- 
phony, an  overture,  and  many  quintets  and  quartets ; and  J.  F.  Kittl  (d. 
1868),  trained  at  Prague,  where  in  1843  he  followed  Dionys  Weber  as  head 
of  the  conservatory,  with  3 symphonies  (one  given  by  Mendelssohn  at  Leipsic 
in  1840)  and  several  chamber  works,  besides  4 operas  (1825-54)  and  church 
music.  The  Tyrolese  Johann  Rufinatscha  (d.  1893),  long  prominent  at  Vienna 
as  a teacher,  wrote  5 symphonies,  4 overtures,  a piano-concerto,  etc.  The 
Hungarian  Mosonyi  [Michael  Brandt]  (d.  1870),  though  classically  trained, 
after  living  from  1842  at  Pesth  and  being  intimate  with  Liszt,  became  eager, 
especially  about  i860,  to  emphasize  national  qualities.  In  this  vein  he  wrote 
a memorial  symphony,  a symphonic  poem,  an  overture,  besides  3 operas 
(from  1857). 

Robert  Volkmann  (d.  1883),  born  in  Saxony  in  1813,  studied  chiefly  with 
K.  F.  Becker  at  Leipsic,  receiving  help  from  Schumann’s  kindly  interest. 
From  1839  he  taught  at  Prague,  but  in  1842  removed  to  Pesth,  where  he 
worked  for  over  40  years  (except  1854-8  at  Vienna),  and  where  he  was  pro- 
fessor of  harmony  and  counterpoint  at  the  National  Academy.  Among  his 
numerous  works  are  2 able  symphonies,  a Festouverture  and  one  to  Richard 
III.,  3 famous  serenades,  6 quartets,  2 trios,  a ’cello-concerto,  etc.,  besides 
piano  and  vocal  works.  He  united  old  and  new  features  with  a notable  clarity 
and  euphony  of  style.  Occasionally  he  chose  Hungarian  themes.  Properly, 
he  is  to  be  classed  as  a transplanted  German  composer,  somewhat  connected 
with  Schumann. 

Friedrich  Smetana  (d.  1884),  on  the  other  hand,  was  not  only  deeply  im- 
bued with  the  most  advanced  ideas  of  the  new  school,  but  devoted  to  the 
exploitation  with  vigorous  originality  of  the  national  music  of  Bohemia.  He 
was  born  in  1824  and  was  trained  as  a pianist  by  Proksch  at  Prague  and  by 
Liszt.  His  life  was  largely  associated  with  Prague,  where  he  taught  in  1848- 
56  and  where  in  1866-74  he  was  conductor  at  the  National  Theatre,  retiring 
because  of  increasing  deafness.  He  wrote  9 symphonic  poems,  beginning 


590 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


with  the  cycle  1 My  Country,1  a symphony,  2 quartets,  a trio,  etc.,  besides  8 
Bohemian  operas  (from  1865),  piano  works  and  songs. 

Anton  Bruckner  (d.  1896)  was  born  in  Upper  Austria,  also  in  1824.  His 
early  studies  were  mostly  alone  and  on  the  organ.  In  1855  he  became  cathe- 
dral-organist at  Linz,  later  studying  with  Kitzler  and  Sechter.  From  1867  he 
followed  the  latter  as  court-organist  at  Vienna,  being  also  professor  at  the 
conservatory  and  from  1875  lecturer  at  the  university.  He  twice  toured  in 
western  Europe  as  a virtuoso  organist  of  the  first  rank.  His  learning  as  a 
contrapuntist  and  his  sympathy  with  the  most  advanced  ideas  of  style  are 
shown  in  9 symphonies,  and  abundant  chamber  and  choral  music.  On  the 
whole,  however,  he  is  more  abstruse  than  inspired. 

Karl  Goldmark,  born  in  Hungary  in  1830,  received  his  formal  education,  as 
far  as  it  went,  in  Vienna  and  has  always  worked  there.  From  1858  he  became 
prominent  as  a pianist  and  composer,  among  his  early  works  being  chamber 
pieces,  the  overture  Sakuntala  and  a cyclic  orchestral  work.  In  1875  came 
his  brilliant  opera  Die  Konigin  von  Saba , to  which  4 more  have  succeeded. 
His  orchestral  list  includes  2 symphonies,  5 overtures  and  a symphonic  poem, 
written  in  a style  full  of  spirit  and  warmth,  but  not  profound. 

A Bohemian,  trained  at  Prague,  but  working  elsewhere,  is  Joseph  Abert. 
Entering  the  Stuttgart  orchestra  as  a double-bassist,  his  talent  for  composition 
led  to  his  promotion  in  1867  to  be  conductor  at  the  court-theatre,  whence  he 
retired  in  1888.  His  works  include  6 symphonies  (from  1852),  overtures,  quar- 
tets, the  symphonic  poem  Kolumbus  (1864),  5 operas  (1858-90),  songs,  etc. 

The  so-called  ‘New-Russian’  movement  came  into  view  be- 
fore the  close  of  the  middle  period  of  the  century,  though  its  full 
development  as  a national  school  belongs  to  the  recent  period. 
In  the  field  of  opera  the  young  Slavic  enthusiasts  were  quick  to 
parallel  Wagner’s  theories  by  a program  of  their  own  aiming  at 
the  same  dramatic  results,  but  naturally  through  somewhat 
different  technical  means.  In  the  field  of  orchestral  music  they 
turned  into  paths  like  those  of  Berlioz  and  Liszt,  particularly  as 
the  Slavic  artistic  drift  is  toward  sensuous  richness,  passion- 
ate extravagance,  and  a certain  recklessness  and  whimsicality 
of  procedure.  Against  this  New-Russian  movement,  however, 
stood  Rubinstein  — a genuine  Slav  whose  style  had  been  shaped 
largely  upon  German  lines.  The  result  of  his  attitude  was  an 
unfortunate  alienation  between  him  and  his  urgent  compatriots, 
an  exaggerated  desire  on  his  part  to  belittle  the  achievements  of 
Wagner,  and  finally  a morbid  pessimism  regarding  the  future  of 
musical  art.  But  these  critical  opinions  did  not  prevent  him 
from  expressing  his  individuality  through  a variety  of  important 
works,  orchestral  and  vocal,  some  of  which  have  considerable 
significance. 


THE  RUSSIAN  GROUP 


59 


The  pioneers  were  Michail  Glinka  (d.  1857),  whose  orchestral  pieces, 
including  2 unfinished  symphonies  and  some  chamber  works,  began  before 
1845,  and  who,  though  a pupil  of  Dehn,  had  the  audacity  of  style  to  win 
Berlioz’  cordial  interest;  Alexander  Dargomyzski  (d.  1869),  whose  orchestral 
efforts  consisted  only  of  fantasias  on  popular  dances  and  songs ; and  Prince 
Yourij  Galitzin  (d.  1872),  notable  not  as  a composer,  but  for  the  orchestra 
that  he  organized  about  i860  for  the  performance  through  Europe  and  America 
of  Russian  works. 

Mily  Balakirew,  born  in  1836  and  known  as  a pianist  from  1855  and  as  a 
conductor  at  Prague  and  St.  Petersburg  from  r866  (retiring,  however,  in  1872), 
produced  3 overtures  (Russian,  1862,  Czech,  Spanish),  the  symphonic  poem 
Tamara  and  a symphony  (1897).  He  supplied  much  of  the  trained  informa- 
tion that  guided  the  projectors  of  the  New-Russian  movement  about  1855  — 
Alexander  Borodin  (d.  1887),  Modest  Mussorgski  (d.  1881),  Cesar  Cui  and 
Nicolai  Rimski-Korsakow  — and  his  house  was  their  original  rendezvous 
(see  sec.  232).  The  very  influential  opera-writer  and  critic  Serow  (d.  1871), 
though  personally  in  close  contact  with  the  above,  was  not  marked  as  an 
orchestral  writer  (see  sec.  205). 

Anton  Rubinstein  (d.  1894),  most  famous  as  a pianist  (see  secs.  202,  205), 
wrote  in  all  6 symphonies,  beginning  in  1854,  of  which  the  most  famous  are 
the  ‘ Ocean’  (1868)  and  the  ‘Dramatic’  (1875),  3 overtures,  a symphonic 
poem,  3 character-pictures  and  a suite,  besides  5 piano-concertos  and  a large 
amount  of  chamber  music.  In  spite  of  his  critical  predilections,  his  style  links 
him  closely  with  the  Liszt  movement,  but  with  an  instinctive  adherence  to 
methods  in  technical  procedure  recalling  the  German  romanticists.  His  use  of 
orchestral  resources  was  lavish  and  rich,  and  the  exuberance  of  his  imagination 
often  results  in  passages  of  beauty  and  power. 

The  modern  master  of  Russian  orchestral  production,  Peter  Tschaikowski 
(d.  1893),  with  his  6 symphonies,  7 symphonic  poems,  4 suites,  exquisite 
chamber  works,  etc.,  lies  outside  the  period  here  under  consideration. 

Brahms  became  known  before  1850.  This  fact  alone  would 
make  reference  to  him  here  necessary,  though  his  most  effective 
work  was  in  the  last  period  of  the  century.  His  maturity  was 
reached  early,  but  the  affiliations  of  his  style  were  not  at  once 
clear.  Schumann  believed  him  the  opener  of  ‘ new  paths  ’ — 
meaning,  however,  paths  fresh  in  romantic  imagination.  At  the 
same  moment  Liszt  counted  him  an  accession  to  the  ranks  of 
the  New-Germans.  And  a little  later  Hanslick  and  others  cited 
his  works  as  antidotes  to  Wagnerian  heresies.  It  was  amid  in- 
cessant and  excited  controversy  in  critical  circles  that  he  went 
his  way,  calmly  working  out  his  impulses,  sturdily  holding  his 
independence,  and  finally  taking  his  place  as  one  of  the  fore- 
most geniuses  of  the  century.  His  adherence  in  the  main  to 
the  older  forms  and  methods,  his  love  for  rhythmic  and  metric 


592 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


intricacy,  his  prodigious  contrapuntal  technique,  his  avoidance 
of  dramatic  forms  and  even  of  the  dramatic  point  of  view,  his 
disdain  of  sensuous  beauties  of  effect  for  their  own  sake  — all 
these  characteristics  allied  him  with  those  called  conservatives. 
But  in  his  evident  intellectuality  and  technical  learning  there 
worked  a varied  and  profound  imagination,  creative  gifts  ex- 
tremely individual  and  original,  sympathies  that  were  far  from 
narrow,  and  a power  of  self-expression  full  of  dignity  and  com- 
manding force.  In  the  midst  of  the  prevalent  tendencies  of  the 
day  he  stood  in  the  unique  position  of  one  who  retained  vital 
kinship  with  such  dissimilar  earlier  masters  as  Bach,  Beethoven 
and  Schumann,  while  fully  alive  to  the  new  sources  of  artistic 
material  (such  as  the  Hungarian)  and  to  the  new  emotional  drift 
of  the  19th  century.  In  some  respects  his  style  showed  an  or- 
ganic blending  of  old  and  new  elements  which  have  been  counted 
incompatible.  For  all  these  reasons  his  work  has  singular  in- 
terest and  value. 

Johannes  Brahms  (d.  1897)  was  born  in  1833  at  Hamburg,  the  son  of  a 
player  in  the  theatre-orchestra.  Under  Eduard  Marxsen  of  Altona  (d.  1887) 
he  developed  first  as  a pianist,  but  with  sound  training,  also,  in  the  technique 
of  composition.  In  1848-9  he  was  heard  in  concerts,  and  in  1853,  when  on  a 

tour  with  Remenyi,  he  encountered  Joa- 
chim, through  whom  he  was  introduced 
to  Liszt  and  Schumann.  The  latter’s 
heralding  of  him  in  the  IVeue  Zeitschrift 
as  the  awaited  musical  Messiah  created 
a sensation,  opening  the  way  for  his  first 
publications,  but  also  provoking  anima- 
ted discussion.  In  1854-8  he  was  court- 
conductor  at  Detmold,  with  much 
leisure  for  composition.  In  1859  his  first 
piano-concerto  (at  Leipsic)  occasioned 
criticism,  actually  because  so  rich  in  con- 
tent and  so  bare  of  display.  After  short 
sojourns  at  Hamburg  and  Winterthur 
(with  Kirchner),  in  1862  he  settled  in 
Vienna.  From  i860  his  style  seemed  to 
undergo  a change,  intricacy  and  learning 
being  now  less  obtrusive.  His  only 
official  posts  were  as  conductor  of  the 
Singakademie  in  1863-4  and  of  the  Gesellschaft  der  Musikfreunde  in  1871-4. 
In  1864-9  and  aSain  in  1874-8  he  was  absent  from  Vienna  for  various  pur- 
poses, including  concert-giving.  He  took  pains  to  retain  connection  with 
Mme.  Schumann,  who  was  a sympathetic  friend  and  interpreter.  For  the 


BRAHMS 


593 


most  part,  his  life  was  without  external  incident,  being  spent  in  the  quiet  and 
secluded  pursuit  of  artistic  ideals.  He  died  of  a painful  disease  and  was 
buried  close  to  Beethoven  and  Schubert. 

His  works  were  not  extraordinarily  numerous,  but  they  were  elaborated 
with  the  minutest  care  and  earnestness.  At  first  they  were  chiefly  for  the 
piano,  the  solo  voice  or  the  chamber  ensemble.  In  i860  came  the  earliest  of 
his  serenades  for  orchestra.  Several  choral  works  followed,  notably  the 
Deutsches  Requiem  (1867-8,  Vienna  and  Bremen),  the  Triumphlied  (1872-3, 
Vienna  and  Cologne,  celebrating  the  German  victories)  and  the  Schicksalslied 
— all  displaying  marvelous  technical  and  emotional  power.  At  intervals  came 
many  important  piano  works,  including  2 concertos,  manifold  songs  of  ex- 
treme beauty  and  a succession  of  chamber  works.  The  4 symphonies 
(1876-86)  were  notably  different  from  each  other,  displaying  the  complex 
structure,  rhythmical  and  melodic  fertility,  sustained  energy  and  disdain  of 
merely  superficial  effect  that  mark  his  whole  style.  With  these  appeared  the 
Akademische  Festouvertiire  (1881)  and  the  Tragische  Ouvertiire  (1881)  in 
contrasted  tones  of  sentiment. 

In  the  fields  of  the  song,  the  choral  cantata,  the  classical  quartet  and  the 
symphony,  Brahms  certainly  ranks  as  the  chief  master  in  the  period  just  after 
1850. 

215.  Famous  Violinists  and  Cellists.  — It  is  interesting  to 
note  about  the  middle  of  the  century  a gradual  change  in  the 
critical  estimate  of  virtuosity  as  a profession.  Touring  for  the 
purpose  of  appealing  to  a variety  of  audiences  continues  common, 
of  course,  but  the  number  of  great  players  who  thus  become 
known  is  less  in  proportion  to  those  whose  powers  are  concentrated 
upon  stated  work  in  some  local  circle  where  they  are  associated 
with  a fixed  orchestra  or  similar  organization.  In  other  words, 
the  virtuoso  begins  to  lose  the  marks,  once  considered  necessary, 
which  remind  us  of  the  strolling  mountebank  of  the  Middle  Ages, 
and  finds  his  higher  place  in  connection  with  some  institution 
maintained  as  a stated  means  of  local  education.  In  consequence, 
virtuosity  of  the  highest  rank  now  usually  involves  readiness  in 
ensemble  playing,  in  conducting,  in  solid  composition,  in  broad 
musicianship,  as  well  as  the  power  to  sway  casual  audiences  to 
enthusiasm  or  to  execute  difficult  feats.  Furthermore,  the  work 
of  teaching  on  the  part  of  solo  instrumentalists  becomes  more 
orderly  and  thoughtful,  so  that  they  compete  more  equally  with 
teachers  in  other  branches.  The  trend  of  progress  is  everywhere 
toward  greater  dignity  and  breadth  in  the  virtuoso’s  conception 
of  himself  and  toward  higher  respect  for  him  on  the  part  of  the 
musical  public. 

2Q 


594 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


Space  fails  to  present  the  cumulative  evidence  for  these  statements.  But  a 
few  selected  masters  of  stringed  instruments  require  special  mention.  Of  the 
violinists  already  in  full  career  when  the  period  opens  the  chief  was  certainly 
Spohr  (d.  1859),  since  1822  fruitfully  at  work  at  Cassel  (see  sec.  181,  where 
others  are  also  named). 

Ferdinand  David  (d.  1873)  is  a typical  example  of  the  best  class.  Born  at 
Hamburg  in  1810  and  hence  the  close  contemporary  of  Mendelssohn  and 
Schumann,  after  study  with  Spohr  and  Hauptmann,  and  a brief  experience  in 
a theatre-orchestra  in  Berlin,  from  1829  he  led  the  private  quartet  of  a Russian 
noble  at  Dorpat  (whose  daughter  he  married),  and  played  often  in  Russian 
cities.  From  1836  he  was  concertmaster  of  the  Gewandhaus  orchestra  as 
reorganized  by  Mendelssohn.  Here  he  exercised  phenomenal  influence  as 
trainer,  interpreter,  teacher  and  composer.  He  was  Mendelssohn’s  devoted 
coadjutor,  and  naturally  entered  the  new  conservatory  as  one  of  its  ablest  pro- 
fessors, attracting  strong  pupils  from  all  quarters.  His  compositions  included 
2 symphonies,  5 concertos,  much  chamber  music,  etc.,  and  he  edited  violin 
classics  and  a famous  method. 

Delphin  Alard  (d.  1888),  though  younger,  came  into  view  about  the  same 
time.  Trained  by  Habeneck  at  Paris,  he  at  once  found  place  at  the  Opdra 
and  later  in  the  court-orchestra,  of  which  he  became  concertmaster.  From 
1843  he  was  professor  at  the  Conservatoire.  His  style  combined  the  brilliance 
of  Paganini  with  the  breadth  of  the  best  German  masters.  He  prepared  a 
fine  method,  good  editions  of  violin  music  and  many  original  works. 

Famous  examples  of  touring  players  were  the  superficial,  but  clever  Ole 
Bull  (d.  1880),  the  Norwegian  player  who  began  his  career  in  1832,  often 
visiting  America  and  doing  much  for  the  cause  of  music  in  his  native  land; 
Camillo  Sivori  (d.  1894),  a Genoese  in  the  Paganini  line  who  began  his 
travels  as  a boy  about  1827  ; and  Heinrich  Wilhelm  Ernst  (d.  1865),  a Mora- 
vian, trained  by  De  B^riot  and  on  tour  extensively  from  1834,  after  1850 
living  in  London. 

Henri  Vieuxtemps  (d.  1881),  born  in  Belgium  in  1820,  was  developed  by 
De  Beriot,  Sechter  and  Reicha  into  broad  musicianship,  appearing  in  concert 
about  1830.  From  1837  he  was  known  in  several  countries  as  both  player 
and  composer,  becoming  court-musician  and  conservatory  professor  at  St. 
Petersburg  in  1846-52,  and  in  1871-3  at  the  Brussels  conservatory,  ceasing 
work  because  of  paralysis.  His  numerous  works  included  6 concertos,  many 
fantasias,  some  studies,  a suite,  etc.,  which  are  standard  favorites. 

Other  representatives  of  the  French  school  were  Prosper  Sainton  (d.  1890), 
who,  after  experience  at  Paris  and  Toulouse,  with  some  tours,  from  1845  lived 
in  London  as  a leading  teacher  and  concertmaster,  with  2 concertos  and  some 
other  works;  Charles  Dancla,  professor  at  the  Conservatoire  since  1857,  a 
noted  ensemble  player,  and  a prolific  composer  of  elaborate  concert  and  peda- 
gogic works;  and  Hubert  Leonard  (d.  1890),  from  1852  De  B^riot’s  suc- 
cessor at  the  Brussels  conservatory,  with  5 concertos,  many  teaching-pieces, 
etc.  Contemporary  with  these  was  Antonio  Bazzini  (d.  1897),  brought  up  at 
Brescia,  but  broadened  by  tours  in  Germany,  who  from  1873  was’ at  the  Milan 
conservatory,  from  1882  its  director,  with  a variety  of  works,  vocal  and  instru- 
mental, in  which  he  united  Italian  and  German  styles. 


NOTED  VIOLINISTS 


595 


Joseph  Joachim  (d.  1907),  born  at  Pressburg  (Hungary)  in  1831,  was  on  the 
whole  the  greatest  name  in  the  period  and  since.  After  study  at  Vienna,  he 
came  to  Leipsic  in  1843  and  immediately  rose  to  eminence,  finally  being 
David’s  assistant.  In  1849-54  he  was  leader  under  Liszt  at  Weimar,  was  then 
conductor  and  soloist  at  Hanover,  and  in  1868  was  called  to  take  charge  of 
the  new  Hochschule  at  Berlin,  where  he  was  extremely  influential.  As  an 
interpreter  he  was  unrivaled,  and  as  a composer  productive,  in  a style 
having  usually  a pathetic  intensity,  though  following  classical  models  of  form. 

From  the  east  came  also  the  Hungarian  Eduard  Remenyi  (d.  1898),  from 
1848  for  a half-century  known  round  the  world  as  a concert-player  of  extraor- 
dinary brilliance;  the  Bohemian  Ferdinand  Laub  (d.  1875),  frc>m  1853 
Joachim’s  successor  at  Weimar,  from  1855  a foremost  master  at  Berlin,  and 
later  at  Moscow  and  Carlsbad;  and  the  Pole  Henri  Wieniawski  (d.  1880), 
a widely-traveled  virtuoso,  in  1860-72  at  St.  Petersburg  and  in  1874-7  Vieux- 
temps1  successor  at  Brussels.  The  last  two  were  composers  to  a limited 
extent. 

Of  the  same  period  was  the  Spaniard  Gesu  Monasterio  (d.  1903),  trained  at 
Paris,  who  from  1861  was  the  centre  of  classical  violinism  at  the  Madrid 
court  and  conservatory.  The  Belgian  Francois  Jehin  (d.  1899),  born  in 
1839,  developed  early  as  a virtuoso,  known  through  Europe  and  America, 
and  from  1893  settled  at  Montreal  and  from  1896  at  Brussels. 

Among  famous  teachers  should  be  mentioned  Georg  Hellmesberger  [Sr.] 
of  Vienna  (d.  1873)  i Lambert  Meerts  of  Brussels  (d.  1863)  ; and  Lambert 
Joseph  Massart  of  Paris  (d.  1892). 

Noted  quartets  were  formed  by  Joseph  Hellmesberger  [Sr.]  of  Vienna 
(d.  1893),  in  1855  by  Karl  Miiller  of  Meiningen,  and  later  by  Joachim,  Laub, 
Jean  Becker  (d.  1884)  and  others. 

As  illustrations  of  the  many  ’cellists  of  substantial  musicianship  may  be 
named  Friedrich  August  Kummer  of  Dresden  (d.  1879)  ; Adrien  Francois 
Servais  (d.  1866),  from  1836  touring  and  from  1848  at  the  Brussels  con- 
servatory; Karl  Schuberth  (d.  1863),  from  1835  honored  at  St.  Petersburg; 
Alfredo  Piatti  (d.  1901),  working  from  1849  at  London;  Georg  Goltermann 
(d.  1898),  from  1853  prominent  at  Frankfort;  Friedrich  Griitzmacher  (d. 
1903),  from  1849  at  Leipsic  and  from  i860  at  Dresden;  bis  brother  Leopold 
Griitzmacher  (d.  1900),  successively  at  Leipsic,  Schwerin,  Prague,  Meiningen 
and  Weimar;  and  Joseph  Diem  (d.  1894),  from  1866  at  the  Moscow 
conservatory. 

Mention  should  also  be  made  of  the  famous  double-bassist  Giovanni 
Bottesini  (d.  1889),  a great  concert-player  and  a prolific  composer  of  operas 
(1847-80),  orchestral  and  chamber  music,  and  songs. 

216.  Other  Instrumentalists.  — The  rapidly  increasing  interest 
in  orchestration  tended  to  direct  attention  afresh  to  the  possi- 
bilities of  every  solo  instrument,  encouraging  the  invention  of 
improvements  and  of  altogether  new  forms,  stimulating  extreme 
virtuosity  and  the  exact  methods  of  teaching  by  which  it  is  at- 


596 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


tained,  and  drawing  out  special  compositions  of  various  kinds. 
In  particular,  the  enterprising  efforts  of  Berlioz,  Kastner,  Wag- 
ner and  Liszt  expanded  the  whole  range  of  orchestral  art,  bring- 
ing into  view  many  novelties  in  construction,  execution  and  ex- 
pressive application.  The  gains  in  color,  variety,  tonal  breadth 
and  emotional  impressiveness  were  in  many  cases  of  the  utmost 
value.  Practically  all  the  resources  of  the  most  modern  orchestra 
were  developed  before  1865,  and  their  use  in  dramatic,  sym- 
phonic, chamber  and  solo  works  made  clear. 

Reference  has  already  been  made  (sec.  183)  to  the  improvements  and 
novelties  introduced  from  about  1830  by  Bohm  of  Munich  (d.  1881),  Sax  of 
Brussels  and  Paris  (d.  1894)  and  Wieprecht  of  Berlin  (d.  1872).  Another 
important  creator  of  instruments  was  the  Bohemian  Vdclav  Frantisek  Cerveny 

of  Koniggratz  (d.  1896),  who  for  30  years 
from  1844  not  only  invented  a long  series  of 
notable  brass  wind-instruments,  but  greatly 
improved  the  mechanism  and  shape  of  several 
forms  already  in  use  (including  the  timpani). 
His  favorite  invention  was  the  waldhorn  group. 
He  set  up  a factory  which  has  furnished  instru- 
ments to  leading  military  bands  everywhere.  In 
1863  the  French  bandmaster  Samis  matched 
the  saxophone  with  the  ‘ sarrusophone  ’ — a 
brass  instrument  with  an  oboe  mouthpiece  — 
which  has  been  made  in  a variety  of  sizes. 
These  newer  brass  instruments  have  not  as 
yet  been  specially  useful  in  the  concert-orches- 
tra, but  they  have  increased  the  resources  of 
the  military  band.  The  composite  instrument 
now  known  as  the  ‘ orchestrion 1 was  developed 
out  of  earlier  experiments  in  1851  by  Friedrich 
Theodor  Kaufmann  of  Dresden  (d.  1872). 

Celebrated  flutists  of  the  period  were  Jean 
Remusat  of  London  and  Paris  (d.  1880)  ; Giulio 
Briccialdi  of  London  (d.  1881);  Franz  Doppler 
(d.  1883),  chiefly  of  Vienna,  who  also  wrote 
several  operas  (from  1847)  ; his  brother  Karl 
Doppler  of  Pesth  and  Stuttgart  (d.  1900); 
Joseph  Henri  AltSs  of  Paris  (d.  1899);  Ernst 
Wilhelm  Heinemeyer  of  Hanover  and  St.  Peters- 
burg (d.  1869)  ; and  Wilhelm  Barge  of  Detmold 

Fig.  109.  — Sarrusophones.  and  Leipsic. 

Among  the  oboists  were  Apollon  Barret  of  Paris  (d.  1879)  ; Antoine  Joseph 
Lavigne  of  London  (d.  1886)  ; and  Franz  Xaver  Jelinek  of  Salzburg  (d. 


VARIOUS  INSTRUMENTALISTS 


597 


1880).  Noted  bassoonists  were  Jean  Baptiste  Joseph  Willent  of  Brussels 
and  Paris  (d.  1852)  ; and  the  distinguished  Dutch  composer  and  conductor 
Johannes  Meinardus  Coenen  of  Amsterdam  (d.  1899). 

The  clarinettists  included  Hyacinthe  ElSonore  KlosS  of  Paris  (d.  1880)  ; 
Arnold  Joseph  Blaes  of  Brussels  (d.  1892);  Henry  Lazarus  of  London  (d. 
1895)  ; Bernhardt  Landgraf  of  Leipsic  (d.  1885)  ; and  Karl  Barmann  [Sr.] 
of  Munich  (d.  1885). 

Among  the  hornists  were  Johann  Gottfried  Rode  of  Berlin  (d.  1857),  and 
D6sir6  Artot  of  Paris  and  Brussels  (d.  1887).  Important  cornettists  were 
Joseph  Arban  of  Paris  (d.  1889),  and  Julius  Kosleck  of  Berlin.  In  the  Leipsic 
orchestra  from  1835  was  the  timpanist  Ernst  Gotthold  Benjamin  Pfundt  (d. 
1871),  the  inventor  of  the  1 machine-head.’ 

The  harp  continued  to  be  carefully  studied,  prominent  virtuosi  being 
Theodore  Labarre  of  Paris  (d.  1870)  ; Elias  Parish-Alvars  of  Vienna  (d. 
1849);  F6lix  Godefroid  of  Paris  (d.  1897)  ; Karl  Oberthiir  of  London  (d. 
1895)  ; Ange  Conrad  Prumier  of  Paris  (d.  1884)  ; and  John  Thomas  [Aptom- 
mas]  of  London. 

Music  for  the  zither  advanced  into  considerable  artistic  importance.  The 
instrument  was  specially  improved  and  cultivated  by  Max  Albert  of  Berlin 
(d.  1882). 

Besides  the  eminent  conductors  already  named,  mention  should  be  made 
of  Karl  Liebig  (d.  1872),  in  1843-67  head  of  an  orchestra  at  Berlin;  Ben- 
jamin Bilse  (d.  1902),  from  1843  town-musician  at  Liegnitz,  developing  an 
exceptional  band,  and  in  1868-84  leader  of  famous  concerts  at  Berlin;  Karl 
Muller  (d.  1894),  from  1846  at  MUnster  and  from  i860  at  Frankfort;  Johann 
Herbeck  (d.  1877),  from  1853  influential  at  Vienna;  Julius  von  Bernuth  (d. 
1902),  from  1857  at  Leipsic  and  from  1867  at  Hamburg;  and  many  others 
later. 

217.  Waltz  Music. — Among  the  many  dances  that  have  be- 
come standard  objects  of  artistic  treatment  none  has  been  so 
popular  as  the  waltz,  which  was  evolved  from  the  simple  Austrian 
landler  about  1780.  Originating  probably  in  Bohemia  and  pro- 
ceeding from  Vienna  as  a centre,  by  1800  it  had  become  fashion- 
able in  all  European  cities.  The  purely  musical  waltz-form  was 
promptly  utilized  by  the  Viennese  composers  generally,  beginning 
with  Mozart  and  Beethoven.  It  was  finally  expanded  by  Schu- 
bert, while  Weber  lifted  it  into  an  orchestral  type.  Later  the 
romantic  and  the  bravura  pianists  used  it  constantly  for  salon  and 
concert  pieces,  often  with  extreme  beauty  of  sentiment  and  effect, 
though  usually  without  reference  to  actual  dancing.  But  mean- 
time, at  Vienna  and  to  some  extent  elsewhere,  waltzes  for  danc- 
ing became  notable  in  the  hands  of  clever  composers  and 
conductors  who  made  the  form  a specialty. 


598 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


A variety  of  other  dances  later  came  into  similar  musical 
importance,  such  as  the  galop,  the  polka,  the  polonaise,  the 
redowa,  the  mazurka,  etc. 

The  first  of  the  Vienna  waltz-makers  was  Joseph  Lanner  (d.  1843),  who 
organized  a popular  quartet  and  orchestra  soon  after  1820.  His  pupil  Johann 
Strauss  [Sr.]  (d.  1849)  formed  another  orchestra  in  1826,  with  which  in 
1 833-8  he  toured  through  Europe.  One  of  his  three  sons,  Johann  Strauss 
[Jr.]  (d.  1899),  was  the  most  celebrated  of  the  whole  series,  beginning  com- 
petition with  his  father  in  1844,  and  from  1871,  after  winning  international 
renown,  writing  many  bright  operettas.  Among  the  numerous  other  workers  in 
the  field  were  from  1834  Joseph  Labitzky  (d.  1881)  ; from  1836  the  French- 
man Louis  Antoine  Jullien  (d.  i860)  ; from  about  the  same  time  the  Viennese 
Philipp  Fahrbach  [Sr.]  (d.  1885)  ; from  1841  the  Dane  Hans  Christian 
Lumbye  (d.  1874);  from  1843  die  Hungarian  Joseph  Gungl  (d.  1889)  and 
his  nephew  Johann  Gungl  fd.  1883);  and  from  about  1847  the  Hungarian 
Keler-B61a  (d.  1882).  In  Paris  the  two  most  famous  dance-makers  were  from 
about  1820  Jean  Baptiste  Joseph  Tolbecque  (d.  1869)  and  from  about  1835 
Philippe  Musard  (d.  1859). 


CHAPTER  XXXVI 


CHORAL  MUSIC.  THE  SONG.  THE  ENGLISH  SCHOOL 

218.  The  Revival  of  Choral  Music.  — The  keen  attention  to 
instrumental  music  which  began  in  the  later  18th  century  was 
so  absorbing  that  for  a long  time  choral  music  was  relatively 
neglected.  Various  kinds  of  church  services,  to  be  sure,  de- 
manded fresh  material,  and  this  was  continually  supplied,  though 
usually  without  much  originality  or  depth.  The  only  branch  of 
vocal  music  (aside  from  the  opera)  that  made  distinct  advance 
during  the  opening  years  of  the  19th  century  was  the  song,  but 
even  this  was  wrought  upon  only  by  some  scattered  composers. 

With  the  definite  access  of  romantic  feeling,  however,  it  was 
inevitable  that  choral  music  should  receive  new  consideration. 
The  conservative  party  emphasized  it  because  it  was  to  them 
the  normal  medium  for  the  application  of  the  older  counter- 
point which  they  admired,  and  because  it  was  opposed  to  the 
prevalent  instrumentalism  which  they  disliked.  Workers  like 
Mendelssohn  and  Schumann  found  in  it  the  means  for  embody- 
ing poetic  conceptions  too  varied  or  exalted  for  merely  solo 
treatment.  And  the  most  radical  experimenters  with  orchestral 
color,  like  Berlioz  and  Liszt,  fully  recognized  the  tonal  splendor 
of  large  vocal  combinations  and  were  quick  to  utilize  such 
impressive  effects  in  building  up  their  complex  ensembles. 
So  it  came  to  pass  that  from  about  1820  onward  the  volume 
of  dignified  choral  music  for  concert  purposes  rapidly  increased, 
and  also  the  variety  of  its  forms. 

In  the  competition  for  popular  effectiveness  and  artistic  achievement 
choral  music  is  noticeably  handicapped.  Orchestral  music  is  supported 
and  purveyed  by  salaried  bands  of  professional  players  under  constant 
discipline  and  giving  frequent  concerts  in  extended  series,  often  in  more 
than  one  place.  But  choral  music,  with  comparatively  few  exceptions,  is 
set  forth  by  volunteer  organizations  largely  made  up  of  amateurs,  having 
much  less  rehearsal  and  giving  concerts  at  much  longer  intervals.  The 
consequence  of  all  this  is  that  the  resources  of  choral  music  are  popularly 
not  as  well  understood  as  those  of  orchestral  music,  its  repertory  is  rela- 

599 


6oo 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


tively  unfamiliar,  and  in  some  cases  the  fine  success  of  particular  com- 
posers with  it  is  comparatively  unknown.  Even  if  we  allow  for  the 
obvious  fact  that  choral  effects  cannot  vie  with  orchestral  in  variety  and 
in  certain  kinds  of  intensity,  it  is  only  fair  to  remember  also  that  choral 
music  has  not  even  yet  attained  the  artistic  eminence  that  is  possible, 
simply  because  in  most  places  it  has  not  been  given  similar  opportunity. 

One  element  in  this  development  was  the  multiplication  in  all 
the  leading  musical  countries  of  singing  clubs  and  societies. 
Whether  this  was  a cause  or  an  effect  may  be  debated,  but 
the  fact  is  impressive  in  any  case.  One  reason  for  it  was  the 
desire  to  do  justice  to  some  of  the  older  composers,  especially 
Handel  and  Haydn.  But  in  part  it  was  a spontaneous  ex- 
pression of  the  new  sense  of  music  as  a popular  fine  art,  having 
exceptional  educational  and  social  applications,  especially  as  it 
was  seen  that  in  choral  music  large  numbers  of  amateurs  can 
personally  engage  in  the  production  of  extremely  artistic  results. 
The  choral  concert  and  festival,  accordingly,  became  common, 
constituting  a new  opportunity  for  the  composer  and  a new 
means  of  contact  between  musical  art  and  the  public.  To  meet 
the  demand  thus  presented  there  was  a marked  increase  not 
only  in  oratorios,  psalms  and  sacred  cantatas,  but  also  in  similar 
works  upon  secular  texts,  including  manifold  settings  of  brief 
lyrics  and  odes.  Many  of  these  latter,  of  course,  were  written 
in  part-song  style,  paralleling  the  simpler  solo  songs,  but  the 
tendency  increased  to  build  them  out  into  complex  works  with 
orchestral  accompaniment  and  with  some  solo  passages.  In 
all  this  we  see  an  effort  to  strike  a fresh  balance  between  vocal 
and  instrumental  music  of  an  elaborate  sort. 

The  Berlin  Singakademie,  founded  by  Fasch  in  1790-2,  was  the  proto- 
type of  a long  series  of  choral  societies,  the  earliest  of  which  followed 
in  this  order  : — Leipsic  and  Stettin  in  1800,  Munster  in  1804,  Dresden  in 
1807,  Zurich  in  1808,  Vienna  in  1812-4,  Potsdam  in  1814,  Bremen  in 
1815,  Chemnitz  and  Hall  (Swabia)  in  1817,  Innsbruck  in  1818,  Frank- 
fort in  1818-21,  Hamburg  and  Giistrow  in  1819,  Jever  in  1820,  Oldenburg 
in  1821,  Cassel  in  1823,  etc. 

The  German  institution  known  as  the  Liedertafel  or  male  choral  club 
began  in  1808  under  Zelter  as  an  offshoot  from  the  Berlin  Singakademie. 
Similar  clubs  soon  followed  elsewhere,  as  at  Frankfurt-an-der-Oder  and 
Leipsic  in  1815,  at  Magdeburg  and  Weida  in  1818,  at  Berlin  (‘Junior1) 
in  1819,  at  Dessau  in  1821,  at  Hamburg  and  Danzig  in  1823,  at  Konigs- 
berg  and  Leipsic  (University)  in  1824,  etc.  At  first  the  aim  was  to 
gather  small,  exclusive  groups  of  experts  — a modern  analogue  to  the 


CHORAL  MUSIC 


601 


mediaeval  Meistersinger  guilds.  But  presently  the  popular  and  social 
idea  became  dominant,  membership  being  open  to  all  with  fair  singing 
ability,  and  the  objects  being  quite  as  much  convivial  or  patriotic  as 
strictly  musical.  Pioneer  efforts  in  this  latter  direction  began  in  1810  at 
Zurich  under  Nageli  and  soon  spread  through  South  Germany  generally. 
In  Austria  similar  movements  began  with  the  founding  of  the  Vienna 
Mannergesangverein  in  1843.  Gradually  in  each  country  and  province 
federations  of  singing-clubs  were  perfected,  chiefly  for  the  holding  of 
large  festivals,  and  out  of  these  about  i860  under  Muller  von  der  Werra 
was  evolved  the  comprehensive  Deutscher  Sangerbund , uniting  more  than 
70  federations  and  over  80,000  singers. 

The  somewhat  parallel  French  institution  of  the  Orpheon  had  a differ- 
ent genesis,  being  the  outgrowth  from  1835  of  the  singing-classes  in  the 
public  schools.  But  in  practical  working  this  has  led  in  both  France  and 
Belgium  to  similar  results  on  a larger  scale.  Before  the  Franco-Prussian 
War  the  Orpheonistes  counted  about  3250  local  clubs  and  nearly  150,000 
members.  The  organizer  of  the  movement  was  Wilhem  [Bocquillon] 
(d.  1842),  but  its  later  success  was  due  to  Gounod,  who  was  its  general 
director  in  1852-60,  and  to  Francis  Bazin  (d.  1878),  the  opera-writer 
(see  sec.  204) . 

Among  the  best-known  wTriters  of  male  choruses  and  part-songs  were  Karl 
Zollner  (d.  i860),  who  taught  at  Leipsic  from  1820  and  in  1833  started  the 
noted  Zollner-Verein  ; Julius  Otto  (d.  1877),  from  1825  an  equally  prominent 
conductor  at  Dresden  ; Franz  Weber  of  Cologne  (d.  1876)  ; the  indefatigable 
Ludwig  Erk  of  Berlin  (d.  1883)  ; Vincenz  Lachner  (d.  1893),  from  1836  at 
Mannheim  and  from  1873  at  Carlsruhe ; Karl  Mangold  of  Darmstadt  (d. 
1889);  Heinrich  Esser  of  Vienna  (d.  1872);  Wilhelm  Tschirch  (d.  1892), 
from  1843  at  Liegnitz  and  from  1852  at  Gera;  Friedrich  Lux  (d.  1895),  from 
1841  at  Dessau  and  from  1851  at  Mayence;  Karl  Reinthaler  of  Cologne  and 
Bremen  (d.  1896);  the  Swiss  Karl  Attenhofer,  from  1867  at  Zurich;  and 
Eduard  Kremser  of  Vienna.  After  i860  many  other  writers  became  influential, 
such  as  Reyer  in  France  and  Bruch  in  Germany. 

219.  The  Berlin  Circle.  — The  modern  importance  of  Berlin  as 
the  capital  of  Germany  began  to  develop  only  after  Napoleon’s 
career  was  checked  in  1813-5.  In  the  outburst  of  patriotic 
aspiration  following  the  War  of  Liberation,  intellectual  and  ar- 
tistic interests,  including  music,  received  much  attention.  But 
those  who  happened  to  be  leaders  in  musical  matters  chose  to 
apply  themselves  almost  exclusively  to  choral  music  of  a some- 
what antique  type.  Hence  arose  a Berlin  group  or  school  which 
long  stood  aloof  from  the  exuberant  instrumentalism  of  the 
Viennese  group  and  from  the  several  phases  of  romanticism 
represented  by  Mendelssohn,  Schumann  and  Chopin,  as  well 
as  from  the  radicalism  of  Wagner,  Liszt  and  Berlioz.  The 


602 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


Berlin  Akademie  became  the  stronghold  of  an  extreme  conserva- 
tism, and  it  was  not  until  toward  the  end  of  the  period  now  under 
review  that  the  liberal  spirit  came  in  which  has  since  made 
Berlin  one  of  the  progressive  musical  capitals  of  the  world. 

It  may  be  that  the  attitude  of  certain  Berlin  masters,  like 
Grell,  Dehn  and  Kiel,  served  a useful  purpose  as  a counterpoise 
to  the  impulsive  swing  of  style  away  from  the  traditions  of  the 
old  vocal  counterpoint.  They  certainly  helped  to  keep  musical 
education  from  forgetting  solid  structure  in  composition  amid  its 
desires  to  exploit  impressionistic  and  sensational  devices.  Prob- 
ably this  reactionary  influence  did  good  in  the  end,  though  its 
intolerant  narrowness  exasperated  the  many  who  were  eagerly 
searching  out  new  paths.  It  at  least  resulted  in  making  Berlin 
a centre  for  choral  music  of  a severe  type,  for  able  teachers  of 
the  art  of  singing,  for  musical  theorists  and  for  scholarly  in- 
vestigators of  music-history. 

One  of  the  most  influential  organizations  was  the  Singakademie , led 
from  1800  by  Zelter  (d.  1832);  from  1833  by  Rungenhagen  (d.  1851), 
who  was  chosen  in  competition  with  Mendelssohn;  in  1851-76  by  Grell 
(d.  1886);  in  1876-1900  by  Martin  Blumner  (d.  1901);  and  since 
1900  by  Georg  Schu?nann. 

The  now  famous  Domchor  began  to  receive  special  attention  about 
1830.  In  1842  it  was  reorganized  under  Mendelssohn’s  advice,  but  its 
eminence  from  1843  was  chiefly  due  to  the  training  of  August  Heinrich 
Neithardt  (d.  1861),  who  was  succeeded  in  1861-89  by  Rudolph  von 
Hertzberg  (d.  1893),  assisted  in  1862-81  by  Heinrich  Kotzolt  (d.  1881), 
who  was  a specialist  in  a cappella  music. 

Among  many  choral  societies  the  most  celebrated  was  the  Gesangverein , 
founded  in  1847  and  till  1874  conducted  by  Julhis  Stern  (d.  1883). 

The  earliest  of  the  music-schools  was  the  Institut  fur  Kirchenmusik , 
projected  in  1819  by  Zelter  and  directed  till  1832  by  him  and  Bernhard 
Klein  (d.  1832).  Later  directors  were  from  1832  A.  IV.  Bach  (d.  1869)  ; 
from  1869  the  organist  Haupt  (d.  1891) ; and  since  1892  Robert 
Radecke.  The  Akademie  der  Kiinste  was  formed  in  1833,  not  simply 
as  an  educational  institution,  but  as  an  honorable  society  of  specialists. 
Mendelssohn’s  brief  and  unhappy  relation  with  it  occurred  in  1841-2. 
The  Institut,  the  Akademie  (Abtheilung  fur  musikalische  Composition) 
and  the  much  later  Abtheilung  fur  ausiibende  Tonkunst  (founded 
in  1869  under  Joachim)  were  in  1875  merged  into  the  significant 
Hochschule  fur  Musik. 

Two  other  schools  were  of  importance.  The  Conservatoriu?n  was 
founded  in  1850  by  Marx , Kidlak  and  Stern , and  from  1857  was  directed 
by  the  latter  alone,  his  successors  being  in  1883-8  Radecke , from  1888 
the  singer  Jenny  Meyer  (d.  1894),  and  since  1895  Gustav  Hollander. 


THE  BERLIN  CIRCLE 


603 


The  N’eue  Akademie  der  Tonkunst  was  established  in  1855  by  Theodor 
Kullak  (d.  1882),  followed  in  1882  by  his  son  Franz  Kullak,  who  dis- 
banded it  in  1890.  Both  institutions  attracted  hundreds  of  pupils. 

In  the  list  of  royal  choirmasters  during  the  period  were  in  1830-42 
Franz  Glaser  (d.  1861),  in  1842-69  Wilhelm  Taubert  (d.  1891),  and  in 
1849-69  Heinrich  Dorn  (d.  1892).  In  1842-51  Meyerbeer  was  the 
dominant  operatic  power. 

Those  who  gave  character  to  the  circle  included  various  kinds  of  workers  — 
choral  composers  or  conductors,  organists,  theorists  and  literary  students. 
Almost  all  of  them  were  strong  teachers. 

Eduard  August  Grell  (d.  1886),  born  in  1800,  came  to  be  the  chief 
representative  of  the  Berlin  ideas.  Beginning  in  1817  as  an  organist,  in 
1839  he  followed  Hellwig  at  the  cathedral.  From  1832  he  assisted  Rungenhagen 
in  leading  the  Singakademie  and  in  1851  succeeded  him  both  there  and  as 
teacher  of  composition  in  the  Akademie.  He  held  tenaciously  to  the  superi- 
ority of  choral  music  over  instrumental,  and  his  contrapuntal  genius  was 
exemplified  in  a series  of  fine  sacred  works,  including  a mass  for  16  voices, 
an  oratorio,  a Te  Deum,  many  psalms,  motets  and  songs.  His  official  positions 
and  his  undoubted  learning  gave  him  great  influence. 

Neither  Karl  Friedrich  Rungenhagen  (d.  1851)  nor  August  Wilhelm  Bach 
(d.  1869),  though  prominent  officially  and  as  teachers,  attained  high  rank  as 
composers,  though  the  former  was  an  industrious  producer. 

Siegfried  Dehn  (d.  1858)  was  at  first  a law-student  at  Leipsic,  but  from 
1829  developed  rapidly  at  Berlin  as  a musical  theorist.  From  1842  he  was 
musical  librarian  at  the  Royal  Library  and  also  for  some  years  editor  of  the 
Cacilia.  His  teaching  and  his  books  (from  1837)  made  him  influential. 

Adolf  Bernhard  Marx  (d.1866),  born  at  Halle  in  1795,  was  one  of  Zelter’s 
pupils.  From  1824  for  several  years  he  edited  the  Berliner  allge?neine 
musikalische  Zeitung , contending  manfully  for  German  composers,  includ- 
ing Beethoven.  From  1830  he  was  professor  at  the  university,  becoming 
distinguished  as  a theorist,  historian  and  pedagogical  reformer  (works  from 
1828).  He  was  intimate  with  the  young  Mendelssohn.  As  a composer  he 
was  not  significant,  though  he  essayed  many  forms. 

Karl  August  Haupt  (d.  1891),  born  in  Silesia  in  1810  and  trained  at  Berlin, 
from  about  1830  held  various  positions  there  as  organist,  becoming  a virtuoso 
and  teacher  of  international  reputation.  He  was  prominent  in  the  Institut 
and  the  Akademie.  His  published  works  include  an  Orgelschule , a Choral- 
buch  (1869)  and  some  songs. 

Friedrich  Kiel  (d.  1885),  born  in  Rhenish  Prussia  in  1821,  was  trained  as 
a violinist  at  Berleburg  and  Coburg,  and  from  1842  in  composition  by  Dehn 
at  Berlin,  where  he  settled.  From  1866  he  was  teacher  of  composition  at  the 
conservatory  and  from  1870  at  the  Hochschule.  His  works  include  2 noble 
Requiems,  the  first  of  which  (1859-60)  established  his  reputation,  a Missa 
solemnis  (1865),  a Te  Deum  (1866),  a Stabat  Mater  (1869),  the  oratorio 
Christus  (1871-2),  much  other  church  music,  many  chamber  works,  piano- 
pieces  and  songs.  In  style  he  illustrated  the  pursuit  of  classical  ideals  under 
modern  conditions,  somewhat  after  the  fashion  of  Mendelssohn. 


604 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


From  the  long  list  of  other  noted  workers  appearing  before  i860  may 
be  selected  Franz  Cornmer  (d.  1887),  the  first  librarian  of  the  Institut 
and  an  intellectual  leader,  Ludwig  Erk  (d.  1883),  Ferdinand  Schulz  (d. 
1897),  Gustav  Engel  (d.  1895),  Georg  Vierling  (d.  1901),  founder  of  the 
Bach-Verein  about  1855,  and  Ferdinand  Sieber  (d.  1895)  ; the  organists 
Julius  Schneider  (d.  1885),  Ludwig  Thiele  (d.  1848),  Ernst  David  Wag- 
ner (d.  1883),  and  Hermann  Kiister  (d.  1878),  Grek's  successor  at  the 
cathedral  in  1857;  and  the  theorists  or  scholars  Von  Winterfeld  (d. 
1852),  Flodoard  Geyer  (d.  1872),  Karl  Friedrich  Weitzmann  (d.  1880), 
Friedrich  Bellermann  (d.  1874),  his  son  Heinrich  Bellermann  (d.  1903), 
Robert  Eitner  (d.  1905),  Hermann  Mendel  (d.  1876),  Emil  Naumann 
(d.  1888),  and  August Reissmann  (d.  1903). 

Although  until  toward  the  end  of  the  period  there  was  no  general 
instrumental  composer  of  eminence  associated  with  Berlin,  the  court- 
orchestra  contained  several  specialists  who  wrote  worthily,  such  as  the 
brothers  Moritz  and  Leopold  Ganz  (d.  1868,  ’69),  Karl  Bohmer  (d. 
1884),  Hubert  Ries  (d.  1886),  Karl  Hering  (d.  1889),  Eduard  Wendt 
(d.  1890),  and  Ferdinand  Laub  (d.  1875). 

The  earlier  Berlin  pianists  were  Theodor  Oesten  (d.  1870),  Rudolf 
Viole  (d.  1867),  Albert  Loschhorn , Theodor  Kullak  (d.  1882),  who  from 
1846  was  court-pianist,  and  Louis  Schlott matin. 

220.  Organ  Music.  — The  form  of  church  music  which  showed 
decided  vitality  was  the  one  connecting  it  with  the  prevailing 
instrumentalism  — music  for  the  organ.  The  Bach  revival  con- 
tinued to  bear  fruit  in  various  ways,  sometimes  in  the  diligent 
cultivation  of  the  strict  style  in  which  he  was  eminent,  sometimes 
in  modifications  looking  toward  a more  modern  expressiveness 
and  sensuous  brilliance.  Catholic  organists  were  naturally  less 
influenced  by  the  Bach  traditions  than  others.  The  German 
players  and  composers  generally  clung  to  the  older  methods, 
but  the  romanticism  that  has  now  become  characteristic  of  the 
French  school  was  beginning  to  manifest  itself.  The  steady 
improvement  of  organ-mechanism  was  providing  varied  tone- 
colors  to  simulate  orchestral  effects,  and  ingenious  devices  for 
handling  the  keyboards  and  the  stops.  Before  the  period  closed, 
the  capacity  of  the  organ  as  a concert-instrument  began  to  be 
appreciated,  so  that  it  was  more  used  in  recitals  of  a varied 
character  and  in  combination  with  the  orchestra.  In  thus 
enrolling  the  organ  among  the  resources  of  concerted  music, 
Berlioz  and  Liszt  were  active.  Whether  these  developments 
promoted  the  best  interests  of  the  organ  style  may  be  doubted, 
but  they  constituted  a noticeable  feature  in  musical  progress. 


ORGAN  MUSIC 


605 


The  more  noted  organists  of  the  German  school  were  Topfer  of  Weimar, 
(d.  1870),  who  was  also  an  expert  on  construction  (books  from  1833)  ; 
Ernst  Kohler  of  Breslau  (d.  1847)  5 Julius  Schneider  of  Berlin  (d.  1885)  ; 
A.  F.  Hesse  of  Breslau  (d.  1863)  ; Haupt  of  Berlin  (d.  1891)  ; August 
Gottfried  Ritter  of  Erfurt  and  Magdeburg  (d.  1885)  ; J.  G.  Bastiaans  of 
Amsterdam  (d.  1875)  > Wilhelm  Volckmar  of  Homburg  (d.  1887)  ; Ludwig 
Thiele  of  Berlin  (d.  1848);  Gustav  Rebling  of  Magdeburg  (d.  1902);  the 
Bohemian  Josef  Krejci  of  Prague  (d.  1881)  ; Johann  Georg  Herzog  of  Munich 
and  Erlangen;  Jan  Albert  van  Eijken  [Eyken]  of  Elberfeld  (d.  1868); 
Merkel  (d.  1885)  and  K.  A.  Fischer  (d.  1892),  both  of  Dresden.  Almost 
all  of  these  were  composers  in  many  other  forms  besides  those  suited  to  the 
organ. 

Among  those  belonging  to  the  French  school  were  Louis  James  Alfred 
Lefebure-Wely  (d.  1869)  ; Antoine  Edouard  Batiste  (d.  1876)  ; Felix  Alex- 
andre Guilmant ; and  the  Belgians  Nicolas  Jacques  Lemmens  (d.  1881)  and 
Alphonse  Mailly  of  Brussels.  Mention  may  also  be  made  of  the  organ- 
expert  M.  P.  Hamel  of  Beauvais  (d.  after  1870). 

For  convenience,  a few  other  church  musicians  who  were  influential  in 
non-Catholic  circles  may  be  here  inserted,  such  as  Salomon  Sulzer  (d.  1890), 
who,  as  cantor  from  1825  at  the  chief  synagogue  of  Vienna,  became  a noted 
reformer  of  Jewish  music;  Gabriel  Lomakin  (d.  1885),  who  from  1830 
worked  fruitfully  to  promote  choral  music  at  St.  Petersburg,  rearranging  and 
augmenting  the  treasures  of  Russian  liturgical  song ; Johann  Friedrich 
Schwencke  (d.  1852)  and  his  son  Friedrich  Gottlieb  Schwencke  (d.  1896), 
whose  successive  terms  as  organists  of  the  Nikolaikirche  at  Hamburg,  and  as 
composers  and  editors  for  the  Lutheran  service,  covered  almost  70  years  from 
1829;  and  the  able  teacher  Immanuel  Faiszt  (d.  1894),  from  1846  known  as 
an  organist  and  chorus-leader  at  Stuttgart,  from  1859  director  of  the  conser- 
vatory there  and  a conservative  composer  of  vocal  and  organ  works. 

Concerning  church  music  in  England  see  sec.  223. 

221.  Catholic  Music.  — In  a measure  analogous  to  the  reactions 
in  other  quarters,  was  the  increasing  desire  among  many  Catho- 
lic church  musicians  to  throw  aside  the  theatric  or  at  least  con- 
certistic  forms  of  liturgical  music  which  the  18th  century  had 
made  prominent.  The  reaction  had  two  aims  — to  restore 
Gregorian  song  in  its  historical  purity  for  the  detail  of  the  ritual, 
and  to  emphasize  a cappella  polyphony  after  the  Palestrina  man- 
ner wherever  more  elaborate  music  was  possible.  The  centre 
of  this  movement  was  Ratisbon,  but  sympathizers  appeared  else- 
where. The  full  results  of  the  effort  were  delayed  until  the 
next  period,  when  investigation  became  more  searching,  and 
when  finally  the  authorities  at  Rome  took  mandatory  action  to 
enforce  uniformity  of  practice  throughout  the  Catholic  world. 
Naturally,  the  reaction  encountered  opposition  from  those  who  had 


6o6 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


become  wonted  to  unlimited  freedom  or  who  seriously  believed 
that  some  compromises  with  modern  styles  of  musical  expression 
were  desirable  in  sincere  church  music.  Hence  at  the  centres 
of  Catholic  music  — in  Austria,  Bavaria,  Italy  and  France  — 
we  find  representatives  of  many  different  styles  working  side 
by  side. 

The  Ratisbon  circle  received  its  character  from  Karl  Proske  (d.  1861). 
Born  in  1794,  he  was  first  a physician,  but  in  1823  took  up  theology  at  Ratis- 
bon, specializing  in  church  music,  gathering  a fine  library,  raising  the  cathe- 
dral-choir to  high  efficiency,  and  from  1850  editing  invaluable  collections  of 
contrapuntal  masterpieces,  especially  Musica  divina  (from  1853).  With  him 
were  associated  the  choir-regent  Johann  Georg  Mettenleiter  (d.  1858),  who 
was  both  composer  and  author;  his  brother  Dominicus  Mettenleiter  (d. 
1868),  whose  interest  lay  in  historical  studies;  Joseph  Schrems  (d.  1872), 
cathedral-choirmaster  from  1839  and  Proske’s  successor  as  editor  of  Musica 
divina ; and  Joseph  Hanisch  (d.  1892),  cathedral-organist  from  1839,  a fine 
player  and  sound  composer.  Later  came  Franz  Witt  (d.  1888),  a priest  who 
in  1867  founded  the  influential  Cacilienverein  and  was  a strong  advocate  of 
ancient  styles;  Johann  Georg  Wesselack  (d.  1866),  and  Michael  Haller, 
choir-regents  after  Mettenleiter;  Josef  Renner  (d.  1895),  from  *858  a 
teacher  of  singing  and  choral  conductor;  and  Franz  Xaver  Haberl,  in  1871— 
1882  cathedral-choirmaster  and  the  most  celebrated  writer  and  editor  of  the 
group  (works  from  1864).  (See  also  sec.  227  for  the  evolution  of  the 
Solesmes  group.) 

Others  who  were  interested  in  the  a cafipella  revival  were  Michael  Topler 
(d.  1874),  trained  at  Breslau  and  Berlin,  from  1825  at  Brtihl  and  a pioneer  in 
antique  music  in  western  Germany ; Eduard  Rottmanner  of  Speyer  (d.  1843)  ? 
Raimund  Schlecht  (d.  1891),  a learned  scholar  at  Eichstadt;  Karl  Kempter 
of  Augsburg  (d.  1871);  Bernhard  Kothe  (d.  1897),  from  1851  at  Oppeln 
and  from  1869  at  Breslau;  Heinrich  Oberhoffer  of  Luxemburg  (d.  1885), 
founder  in  1862  of  the  periodica  Cacilia ; Joseph  Forster,  since  1852  a lead- 
ing organist  at  Prague;  and  Michael  Hermesdorff  (d.  1885),  cathedral- 
organist  at  Treves. 

At  Vienna  the  great  contrapuntist  of  the  period,  though  not  in  antique 
styles  only,  was  Simon  Sechter  (d.  1867),  from  1824  court-organist  and  from 
1851  professor  in  the  conservatory,  who  was  a very  influential  teacher  as  well  as 
a prolific  composer.  Other  church  musicians,  mostly  of  the  rather  showy 
Viennese  school,  were  Joseph  Drechsler  (d.  1852)  ; Benedict  Randhartinger 
(d.  1893),  who  was  prominent  in  the  Imperial  Chapel  from  1832;  Gottfried 
Preyer  (d.  1901),  from  1838  in  the  conservatory  and  for  a time  its  director, 
and  from  1853  choirmaster  at  St.  Stephen’s;  Ludwig  Rotter  (d.  1895),  who 
succeeded  Sechter  in  1867;  and  Franz  Krenn  (d.  1897). 

With  these  may  be  grouped  other  industrious  workers,  such  as  Wenzel 
Emanuel  Hor£k  (d.  1871)  and  Robert  Fiihrer  (d.  1861),  both  of  Prague; 
Johann  Kaspar  Aiblinger  (d.  1867)  and  Franz  Lachner  (d.  1890),  both  of 


CATHOLIC  MUSIC 


607 


Munich ; Peter  Singer  of  Salzburg  (d.  1882) ; Karl  Ludwig  Drobisch 
of  Augsburg  (d.  1854)  ; Moritz  Brosig  (d.  1887)  and  Adolf  Greulich  (d. 
1890),  both  of  Breslau;  and  the  Hungarians  Franz  Seraph  Holzl  of 
Fiinfkirchen  (d.  1884),  and  Paul  Krizkowzky  of  Briinn  (d.  1885). 

In  Italy  the  extreme  advocate  of  the  Palestrina  style  was  Baini  of  Rome 
(d.  1844).  Most  Italian  composers  usually  preferred  more  modern  manners, 
sometimes  verging  upon  the  merely  theatric.  Representative  names  are 
those  of  the  opera-writer  Mercadante  (d.  1870),  from  1833  at  Novara  and 
from  1840  head  of  the  Naples  conservatory;  Alessandro  Nini  of  Bergamo 
(d.  1880)  ; the  two  distinguished  Roman  contrapuntists  Gaetano  Capocci 
(d.  1898)  and  Salvatore  Meluzzi  (d.  1897)  ; Stefano  Ronchetti-Monteviti  of 
Milan  (d.  1882)  ; Antonio  Buzzola  of  Venice  (d.  1871)  ; Teodulo  Mabellini 
of  Florence  (d.  1897)  ; Cesare  Aria  of  Bologna  (d.  1894)  ; andNicolb  Coccon 
of  Venice  (d.  1903).  (Concerning  Raimondi  and  also  Baini,  see  sec.  184.) 

In  France  and  Belgium  there  was  a large  amount  of  notable  investigation 
of  the  problems  of  Gregorian  music  (see  sec.  227).  An  influential  practical 
worker  was  Louis  Niedermeyer  (d.  1861),  who  in  1853  resuscitated  Choroirs 
Church  Music  School  (lapsed  since  1830),  obtaining  for  it  a government 
subsidy,  and  started  the  church  music  periodical  La  Maitrise.  Among  many 
opera-writers  who  also  worked  in  sacred  music,  Gounod  (d.  1893)  was  con- 
spicuous (see  sec.  204). 

The  most  famous  Spanish  church  musician  was  Miguel  Hilario  Eslava 
(d.  1878),  from  1832  choirmaster  at  Seville  and  from  1844  in  the  chapel  of 
Queen  Isabella  (see  sec.  204). 


Fig.  no.  — German  Cabinet  Organ  (17th  century). 


6o8 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


222.  The  Song  and  Ballade. — Just  at  the  epoch  when  the 
most  gigantic  types  of  dramatic  and  choral  writing  were  being 
undertaken,  the  smallest  of  the  important  vocal  forms,  the  song, 
at  length  secured  its  destined  maturity  and  eminence.  The 
most  original  path-breaker  was  undoubtedly  Schubert,  though  his 
full  greatness  was  not  seen  until  years  after  his  death.  Soon 
after  came  Mendelssohn,  who  also  kept  closely  to  classical  mod- 
els of  form.  Later,  Schumann  treated  the  problem  of  the  song 
in  a manner  much  less  regular  and  popular,  but  richer  in  per- 
sonal expression  and  in  imaginative  suggestion.  By  about  1850 
we  find  that  important  composers  rarely  failed  to  cultivate  song- 
writing to  some  degree,  and  by  this  time  several  eminent  spe- 
cialists in  the  song  field,  like  Lowe  and  Franz,  were  already  in 
evidence.  The  sudden  expansion  of  song  literature  about  the 
middle  of  the  century,  like  that  of  piano  literature,  is  bewilder- 
ing to  analyze  or  summarize. 

A few  salient  types  should  be  emphasized  in  thought,  though  they  are 
not  always  actually  distinct.  One  of  the  simplest  is  the  ‘folk-like’ 
song  ( volkthiimliches  Lied),  which  emulates  the  naivete  of  the  genuine 
folk-song,  with  its  balanced  lines,  recurrent  stanzas,  obvious  metric  and 
harmonic  patterns,  and  unobtrusive  accompaniment.  In  such  a song  the 
sentiment  resides  in  the  total  effect  rather  than  in  the  details,  and  success 
often  depends  much  upon  the  indefinable  magnetism  of  the  singer. 
From  this  type  branch  off  innumerable  varieties  of  more  deliberately 
‘artistic’  songs  ( Kunstlieder ),  in  which  either  the  tonal  structure  is 
studiously  elaborated  for  its  own  sake,  or  homely  symmetry  and  trans- 
parency are  replaced  by  a reasoned  effort  to  render  fully  the  contrasts, 
evolutions  and  depths  of  feeling  implied  in  the  text.  In  such  songs  the 
details  assume  great  expressional  importance,  successive  stanzas  are 
often  handled  differently  and  the  functions  of  the  accompaniment  are 
highly  elaborated.  Nothing  is  more  distinctive  of  the  romantic  period 
than  the  manifold  discoveries  then  made  of  ways  to  compress  exquisite 
beauty  and  thrilling  passion  into  brief  phrases  and  passages,  where 
words,  vocal  melody  and  instrumental  setting  are  so  blended  as  to  reflect 
the  deepest  emotions  of  the  heart.  Still  a third  type  is  that  of  the 
‘ ballade,’  which  is  not  so  much  lyric  as  epic  or  dramatic.  This  has 
an  essential  kinship  with  the  operatic  aria,  but  its  treatment  is  more  con- 
densed and  nervous,  and  it  is  wholly  independent  of  theatric  action  and 
accessories,  even  when  in  intensity  it  attains  tragic  sublimity. 

The  simpler  types  of  song  are  specially  apt  for  private  or  domestic 
use,  while  the  more  complex  ones  are  obviously  adapted  to  the  salon  and 
the  concert-hall.  At  every  point  the  evolution  of  song  music  presents 
analogies  with  the  evolution  of  the  smaller  forms  of  piano  music.  From 
the  study  of  the  song  as  an  artistic  type  came  a fruitful  stimulus  for 


THE  ARTISTIC  SONG 


609 


writing  of  other  kinds,  directing  artistic  attention  to  the  infinite  expres- 
siveness possible  in  narrow  limits  through  the  dexterous  manipulation  of 
detail. 

Reference  has  already  been  made  to  Schubert  (secs.  1 73-1 74),  Mendelssohn 
(secs.  1 94-1 95)  and  Schumann  (secs.  1 90-1 91),  as  well  as  to  earlier  com- 
posers (sec.  158). 

Karl  Lowe  (d.  1869),  born  near  Halle  in  1796,  was  a trifle  older  than 
Schubert,  and  his  artistic  production  began  almost  as  early  (in  1818)  ; but 
his  eminence  came  later.  He  was  a noted  boy-singer,  receiving  aid  in  his 
schooling  from  Jerome  Bonaparte,  and  having  careful  instruction  from  Turk 
and  Naue,  besides  knowing  the  famous  Reichardt.  Though  entered  at  Halle 
University  as  a student  in  theology,  before  1820  his  passion  for  music  had 
determined  his  career.  From  1821,  on  nomination  of  Zelter,  he  was  town- 
musician  at  Stettin,  whence  he  resisted  calls  to  remove,  though  he  made 
many  tours  as  singer  and  composer.  Disabled  by  a stroke  of  apoplexy,  he 
spent  his  final  years  at  Kiel.  He  was  an  industrious  composer  of  oratorios,  5 
operas,  piano,  chamber  and  orchestral  works,  but  his  fame  rests  on  his  almost 
40  ballades  (chiefly  1818-47),  of  which  Edward , Der  Erlkonig , Heinrich  der 
Vogler , Der  Nock , Harald , Tom  der  Reimer , Oluf  \ Prinz  Engen  and  Odins 
Meeresritt  are  the  most  noted.  His  style  has  a general  kinship  with  that  of 
Schumann,  and  the  latter  doubtless  derived  something  from  it.  But  his 
union  of  lyric  and  dramatic  elements  and  his  mastery  of  compressed  tonal  ex- 
pression were  highly  individual.  His  style  gave  a powerful  stimulus  to  the 
whole  range  of  writing  for  the  solo  voice  with  piano  accompaniment. 

More  closely  connected  with  Schumann  was  his  slightly  younger  contem- 
porary Volkmann  (d.  1883),  already  emphasized  as  an  instrumental  writer 
(see  sec.  214),  whose  many  songs  and  choral  works  of  varied  character  are 
important. 

Robert  Franz  (d.  1892)  was  born  in  1815  at  Halle.  His  musical  aspira- 
tions were  at  first  checked,  but  finally  found  development  under  Schneider  of 
Dessau.  From  1837  he  pursued  private  studies  of  Bach,  Handel  and  the 
earlier  19th-century  masters  to  such  purpose  that  in  1843  he  stepped  forth  as 
one  of  the  finest  song-writers  of  the  romantic  school,  being  welcomed  by 
critics  as  diverse  as  Mendelssohn,  Schumann  and  Liszt.  He  now  became 
organist  at  one  of  the  Halle  churches  and  was  later  conductor  of  the  Sing- 
akademie  and  director  at  the  university,  but  increasing  deafness  and  nervous 
disorders,  beginning  about  1849,  forced  his  retirement  in  1868.  By  this  time 
his  renown  had  spread  so  widely  that  musicians  in  different  countries  united 
in  raising  a large  fund  for  his  support.  His  songs  altogether  number  about 
350,  ranging  through  many  subjects  and  styles,  but  marked  always  by  extreme 
beauty  of  melody,  refinement  of  conception  and  fullness  of  detailed  finish, 
uniting  in  a remarkable  degree  the  older  strength  of  structure  with  modern 
expressiveness.  He  also  wrote  choral  music,  sacred  and  secular,  but  no 
instrumental  music.  He  was  an  expert  in  the  styles  of  Bach  and  Handel,  and 
from  i860  prepared  remarkably  fine  revised  editions  of  a long  list  of  their 
choral  works.  His  musicianship  was  therefore  much  broader  than  his  original 
works  would  indicate. 


6io 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


Of  a different  class  from  the  foregoing  was  Franz  Abt  (d.  1885).  Born  in 
1819  and  trained  at  Leipsic,  from  1841  he  was  theatre- and  chorus-conductor  at 
Zurich,  where  later  he  was  slightly  connected  with  Wagner.  From  1852  for  30 
years  he  was  court-conductor  at  Brunswick.  He  wrote  over  3000  songs  and 
part-songs,  mostly  simple  and  poptilar,  but  with  a naive  grace  that  has  made 
them  generally  admired. 

Adolf  Jensen  (d.  1879)  belongs  to  a later  generation,  being  born  at  Konigs- 
berg  in  1837.  He  was  precocious  as  a composer.  In  1856  he  taught  in 
Russia,  hoping  later  to  study  with  Schumann.  After  serving  as  conductor  at 
Posen,  in  1858-60  he  studied  with  Gade,  and  in  1866-8  taught  at  Berlin.  But 
his  health  was  feeble  and  he  was  forced  to  try  different  residences,  finally 
dying  of  consumption.  His  works  include  about  160  solo  songs,  many  con- 
certed vocal  works,  some  orchestral  pieces  and  many  beautiful  piano  works. 
His  style  belongs  to  the  Schumann  order,  with  a peculiar  strain  of  rich  feeling 
and  tonal  warmth. 

To  these  greater  names  may  be  added  some  others  out  of  the  multitude  of 
those  who  were  fertile  in  songs  of  various  kinds  : — 

Among  the  Germans  and  Austrians  were  Joseph  Dessauer  (d.  1876),  living 
mostly  at  Vienna;  Ernst  Friedrich  Kauffmann  of  Ludwigsburg  (d.  1856), 
writing  while  in  prison  for  political  radicalism ; the  Bavarian  Karl  Krebs  (d. 
1880),  from  1827  opera-conductor  at  Hamburg  and  in  1850-72  at  Dresden; 
Karl  Friedrich  Curschmann  of  Berlin  (d.  1841)  ; Friedrich  Wilhelm  Kiicken 
(d.  1882),  in  1851-61  at  Stuttgart  and  later  at  Schwerin  ; Wilhelm  Heiser  of 
Berlin  (d.  1897)  ; Karl  Eckert  (d.  1879),  from  1853  at  Vienna,  from  1861  at 
Stuttgart  and  from  1869  at  Berlin  ; Justus  Wilhelm  Lyra  (d.  1882),  a clergy- 
man famous  for  his  student-songs ; and  the  Weimar  masters  Liszt  (d.  1886) 
and  Lassen  (d.  1904). 

Among  Italians  who  cultivated  the  popular  song  were  the  Neapolitans 
Guglielmo  Luigi  Cottrau  (d.  1847),  Luigi  Bordese  (d.  1886),  and  Nicola  de 
Giosa  (d.  1885)  ; the  Tuscan  Luigi  Gordigiani  (d.  i860)  ; the  Florentine 
Ciro  Pinsuti  (d.  1888);  the  Roman  teacher  Leopoldo  Mililotti;  and  many 
others. 

Other  national  strains  of  expression  were  represented  by  the  Frenchmen 
Auguste  Mathieu  Panseron  (d.  1859),  and  Gustave  Nadaud  (d.  1893)  ; the 
Russians  Alexander  Alabjew  (d.  1851),  Alexis  Werstowski  (d.  1862),  and 
Nicolai  Titow  (d.  1875);  the  Pole  Stanislaw  Moniuszko  (d.  1872);  the 
Swede  Adolf  Fredrik  Lindblad  (d.  1878),  and  the  Norwegian  Half  dan  Kjerulf 
(d.1868)  ; the  Hungarian  Franz  Erkel  (d.  1893)  ; the  Bohemians  Joseph 
Nesvadba  (d.  1876),  and  Ludwig  Prochazka  (d.  1888)  ; and  the  Greek 
Spiridion  Xyndas  (d.  1896). 

223.  Music  in  England.  — The  great  feature  within  the  English 
circle  during  this  middle  period  was  the  impress  of  Mendelssohn, 
exerted  through  repeated  visits  between  1830  and  1846.  His 
magnetic  influence  did  much  to  bring  the  English  public  into 
touch  with  some  phases  of  the  musical  life  of  Europe  and  to 


MUSIC  IN  ENGLAND 


6l  I 


enforce  a high  standard  of  technical  correctness  in  both  com- 
position and  performance.  Contact  with  Continental  music 
was  steadily  increased  through  the  English  students  who  now 
began  to  frequent  Leipsic  for  training.  The  Mendelssohnian  in- 
fluence inevitably  produced  a general  tendency  merely  to  imitate 
his  style,  accepting  it  as  representing  all  that  was  good  in  musi- 
cal art.  Not  until  the  next  period  did  English  musicians  really 
shake  themselves  free  from  the  bondage  of  this  tradition  and 
begin  to  bring  to  light  original  powers  of  their  own,  so  as  to 
take  their  place  among  the  constructive  forces  of  the  large  musi- 
cal world.  It  is  only  fair  to  say,  however,  that  amid  this  dor- 
mancy of  creative  power  of  a high  order,  there  were  worthy 
efforts  to  diffuse  sound  musical  notions  in  popular  thought,  so 
that  when  the  new  life  manifested  itself  there  had  been  provided 
a basis  of  popular  interest  and  knowledge  for  it  to  rest  upon. 

The  three  styles  of  music  most  cultivated  were  the  same  that 
had  been  favorites  in  previous  epochs,  namely,  a sober  and 
reverent  type  of  cathedral  music,  now  broadened  by  the  efforts 
of  a large  number  of  competent  workers,  wholesome  and  grace- 
ful songs  and  part-songs,  and  operettas  that  usually  approached 
the  style  of  the  ballad-opera  or  the  singspiel  rather  than  that 
of  the  Continental  opera.  Instrumental  music  was  freshly  han- 
dled only  by  a few  writers,  most  of  them  late  in  the  period. 
London  absorbed  most  of  the  best  musical  life  of  the  King- 
dom, but  here  and  there,  especially  in  connection  with  the  great 
choral  festivals,  provincial  centres  of  importance  were  being 
established. 

In  the  field  of  cathedral  music,  of  course  wholly  designed  to  meet  the 
needs  of  the  Anglican  service,  the  more  productive  workers  were  John  Goss 
(d.  1880),  trained  in  the  Chapel  Royal  and  known  as  an  organist  from  1821, 
who  in  1838-72  was  Attwood’s  successor  at  St.  Paul’s,  being  also  composer 
to  the  Chapel ; James  Turle  (d.  1882),  in  1831-75  the  successor  of  Greatorex 
at  Westminster  Abbey;  Henry  John  Gauntlett  (d.  1876),  specially  useful 
for  his  interest  in  the  improvement  of  the  organ  ; Samuel  Sebastian  Wesley 
(d.  1876),  like  his  father  a great  organist,  located  from  1835  at  Exeter,  from 
1842  at  Leeds,  from  1849  at  Winchester,  and  from  1865  at  Gloucester; 
Henry  Smart  (d.  1879),  another  excellent  player  and  a skillful  writer  not  only 
of  church  music,  but  of  an  opera  (1855)  and  several  graceful  cantatas  (from 
1864) ; G.  A.  Macfarren  (see  below)  ; George  Job  Elvey  (d.  1893),  in 
1835-82  organist  at  Windsor  Castle;  Edward  John  Hopkins  (d.  1901), 
whose  activity  began  in  1834  and  who  from  1843  for  55  years  was  the  honored 


6 12 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


organist  at  the  Temple;  Edwin  George  Monk  (d.  1900),  pupil  of  Macfarren 
and  in  1859-83  organist  of  York  Cathedral;  George  Cooper  (d.  1876),  from 
1856  the  admired  organist  of  the  Chapel  Royal;  John  Matthew  Wilson 
Young  (d.  1897),  in  1850-95  organist  of  Lincoln  Cathedral;  Samuel  Reay 
of  Newcastle  and  Newark;  John  Bacchus  Dykes  (d.  1876),  a clergyman  dis- 
tinguished for  his  gift  as  a writer  of  hymn-tunes;  William  Henry  Monk  (d. 
1889),  from  1847  connected  with  King’s  College,  London;  William  Spark 
(d.  1897),  in  1850-80  organist  at  Leeds  and  editor  of  much  organ  music; 
F.  A.  G.  Ouseley  (see  below)  ; Robert  Prescott  Stewart  (d.  1894),  all  his  life 
a fruitful  worker  at  Dublin;  William  Thomas  Best  (d.  1897),  with  an  inter- 
national reputation  as  an  organist,  working  from  about  1845  at  Liverpool, 
especially  in  1855-94  at  St.  George’s  Hall;  Charles  Steggall,  professor  at 
the  Royal  Academy  from  1851  and  organist  at  Lincoln’s  Inn;  Henry  Hiles 
(d.  1904),  whose  varied  activity  as  composer  and  theorist  belongs  mostly  to 
the  recent  period;  John  Baptiste  Calkin  (d.  1905),  long  known  in  London 
churches;  H.  S.  Oakeley  (see  below);  William  Joseph  Westbrook  (d. 
1894),  a specially  fruitful  organist;  George  Mursell  Garrett  (d.  1897), 
organist  first  at  Winchester,  then  at  Madras,  and  from  1857  at  Cambridge; 
Edward  Henry  Thorne,  from  1853  organist  at  Henley,  Chichester,  Brighton 
and  several  London  churches ; Edmund  Hart  Turpin,  another  conspicuous 
London  organist;  Joseph  Barnby  (d.  1896),  trained  at  York,  from  about 
1855  active  at  London,  especially  as  a choral  conductor  and  the  writer  of 
part-songs  and  the  graceful  cantata  Rebekah  (1870)  ; John  Naylor  (d.  1897), 
in  1856-83  at  Scarborough  and  then  at  York  Cathedral;  the  Netherlander 
Berthold  Tours  (d.  1897),  violinist  and  editor;  Scotson  Clark  (d.  1883),  a 
clergyman  who  attained  wide  repute  as  a concert-organist ; and  John  Stainer 
(d.  1901),  beginning  his  career  as  organist  in  1854,  in  1872-88  Goss’  suc- 
cessor at  St.  Paul’s  and  finally  professor  at  Oxford,  and  a powerful  influence 
upon  musical  education  and  scholarship.  All  these  contributed  freely  to  the 
immense  literature  of  anthems,  services  and  hymn-tunes  which  has  had  so 
wide  an  influence  throughout  the  English-speaking  world.  Several  of  them 
produced  extended  choral  works  in  the  later  period. 

Many  of  the  foregoing  were  able  writers  of  songs  and  part-songs,  especially 
Smart,  Macfarren,  Reay,  Hiles,  Garrett  and  Barnby.  The  old  line  of  real 
glee-makers  was  successfully  prolonged  by  Robert  Lucas  Pearsall  (d.  1856), 
living  mostly  in  Switzerland,  with  many  madrigals  (from  1840)  ; by  James 
Coward  (d.  1880),  from  1857  organist  at  the  Crystal  Palace;  and  by  Henry 
David  Leslie  (d.  1896),  who  from  1855  was  the  indefatigable  leader  of  a 
famous  chorus  for  a cappella  singing.  Still  more  inevitably  were  those 
named  below  more  or  less  active  in  the  song  field.  Among  many  favorite 
ballad-writers  of  unambitious  rank  was  Joseph  Philip  Knight  (d.  1887). 

English  stage-music  in  this  period  still  ran  mostly  to  light  operettas, 
though  with  some  striking  efforts  to  establish  an  English  operatic  type  of  a 
higher  class. 

Two  foreigners  were  early  conspicuous  as  conductors.  One  was  the  Nea- 
politan Michael  Costa  (d.  1884),  who  came  to  London  in  1830,  and  after  1846 
had  charge  of  the  Italian  Opera,  the  Philharmonic  and  Sacred  Harmonic 
Concerts,  and  the  Birmingham  festivals  — the  composer  of  4 Italian  operas  at 


THE  ENGLISH  OPERA 


613 


Naples  (1826-9)  and  of  3 ballets,  the  opera  Don  Carlos  (1844)  and  2 orato- 
rios in  England.  The  other  was  Julius  Benedict  (d.  1885),  born  at  Stuttgart, 
a pupil  of  Hummel  and  especially  of  Weber,  who,  after  operatic  experience  at 
Vienna,  Naples  and  Paris,  came  to  England  in  1835  and  fully  identified  him- 
self with  English  music.  Besides  being  constantly  employed  as  conductor  in 
London  and  at  the  Norwich  festivals,  he  brought  out  6 English  operas  (1838- 
64),  several  choral  works,  piano-pieces  and  2 symphonies.  The  best  of  his 
operas  was  The  Lily  of  Killarney  ( 1 862) . 

Michael  William  Balfe  (d.  1870),  born  at  Dublin  in  1808,  was  the  most 
fertile  of  the  opera-writers.  Coming  to  London  in  1823,  he  worked  first  as 
violinist  and  singer,  with  study  under  good  teachers.  In  1825-33  he  was  in 
Italy  or  at  Paris,  becoming  an  able  dramatic  baritone,  and  writing  3 operas 
(1829-30).  On  his  return  to  London,  he  made  a hit  with  The  Siege  of 
Rochelle  (1835),  followed  soon  by  several  other  popular  works,  2 of  them  in 
Italian,  besides  often  appearing  as  a singer.  In  1841  he  went  to  Paris  and 
scored  success  with  2 operas  comiques  (1843-4),  besides  producing  at  London 
his  most  popular  work,  The  Bohemian  Girl  (1843),  soon  reproduced  in  other 
countries.  A long  line  of  works  in  English,  French  and  Italian  followed  (till 
1863),  and  he  was  much  abroad,  visiting  Vienna,  Berlin,  St.  Petersburg  and 
Trieste,  and  receiving  extraordinary  honors.  In  1864  he  retired.  His  stage- 
works  numbered  about  30.  They  are  over-facile  and  shallow,  but  abound  with 
taking  melodies  and  are  often  scored  with  some  skill. 

William  Vincent  Wallace  (d.  1865),  like  Balfe,  was  an  Irishman,  and  also  a 
ready  melodist  and  clever  playwright.  Among  his  6 operas  were  the  popular 
Maritajia  (1845)  and  Lurline  (i860).  He  also  wrote  much  salon  music  for 
the  piano.  He  lived  an  adventurous  life  in  different  parts  of  the  world. 

Other  writers  for  the  stage  were  John  Barnett  (d.  1890),  whose  Mountain 
Sylph  (1834)  was  the  first  English  opera  since  Arne's  Artaxerxes  (1762),  and 
who  wrote  several  others,  with  innumerable  songs  ; Edward  James  Loder  (d. 
1865),  the  chief  of  whose  few  works  was  The  Night  Dancers  (1846)  ; John 
Hullah  (d.  1884),  whose  three  early  plays  (1836-8)  were  later  completely  for- 
gotten in  his  activity  as  promoter  of  popular  song  and  as  lecturer ; G.  A.  Mac- 
farren  (d.  1887),  among  whose  prolific  productions  were  over  10  operas, 
including  The  Devil's  Opera  (1838),  Don  Quixote  (1846),  Robin  Hood  (i860) 
and  Helvelly?i  (1864),  besides  many  choral  works;  John  Liptrot  Hatton 
(d.  1886),  with  a few  operas  (from  1842),  incidental  music  to  various  plays, 
and  many  songs  ; the  famous  Italian  singing-master  Alberto  Randegger,  who 
settled  in  London  in  1854,  producing  the  comedy  The  Rival  Beauties  (1864) 
and  several  shorter  works,  besides  2 early  Italian  operas  (1852-4)  and  many 
songs  ; and  Frederic  Clay  (d.  1889),  the  composer  of  a long  line  of  operettas 
(from  1859),  2 cantatas  and  numerous  songs. 

The  list  of  those  who  essayed  instrumental  composition  in  the  larger  forms 
with  some  degree  of  power  is  worthy  of  more  attention  than  it  received  in  the 
crowded  and  eager  progress  of  affairs  upon  the  Continent.  Only  some  repre- 
sentative names  can  here  be  mentioned  : — 

Cipriani  Potter  (d.  1871),  trained  both  at  London  and  at  Vienna  (where  he 
met  Beethoven),  was  from  1822  piano-teacher  at  the  Royal  Academy  and  in 


614 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


1832-59  its  principal  He  published  only  piano  and  chamber  works,  but 
wrote  a number  of  symphonies  and  overtures  besides. 

George  Alexander  Macfarren  (d.  1887)  was  one  of  the  best-trained  and 
most  competent  composers  in  the  group.  From  1834  he  taught  in  the  Royal 
Academy  and  from  1876  was  its  principal.  His  works  included  8 symphonies, 
7 overtures,  several  concertos,  good  chamber  music,  piano-sonatas,  operas  and 
other  stage-works,  4 oratorios  (1873-83),  6 cantatas,  part-songs,  duets  and 
songs,  besides  several  theoretical  treatises  and  edited  collections. 

William  Sterndale  Bennett  (d.  1875),  who  was  Macfarren’s  close  contem- 
porary, has  already  been  mentioned  (see  sec.  195). 

Frederick  Arthur  Gore  Ouseley  (d.  1889),  born  in  1825,  the  son  of  a diplomat, 
was  educated  for  the  church,  but  found  opportunity  for  the  large  exercise  of  his 
musical  talents.  From  1855  he  was  professor  at  Oxford,  but  threw  his  strength 
into  the  development  of  a school  at  Tenbury,  which  he  founded  in  1856  and 
enriched  by  generous  gifts.  He  is  best  known  from  his  many  services  and 
nearly  90  anthems,  his  organ-preludes  and  fugues,  his  2 oratorios  (1855-73), 
and  several  collections  of  church  music,  but  he  also  wrote  considerable  cham- 
ber music,  and  sonatas  and  pieces  for  piano.  His  theoretical  knowledge  was 
displayed  in  a series  of  fine  treatises  (from  1868).  His  great  library  was  left 
to  the  college  at  Tenbury. 

Other  names  in  this  middle  period  that  might  be  mentioned  are  the  prolific 
John  Lodge  Ellerton  (d.  1873)  > the  Irish  pianist  George  Alexander  Osborne 
(d.  1893)  ; Thomas  Molleson  Mudie  (d.  1876),  long  a teacher  at  Edinburgh ; 
the  gifted  Henry  Hugo  Pierson  (d.  1873),  who  worked  mostly  in  Germany ; the 
pianist  and  organist  Charles  Edward  Stephens  (d.  1892)  ; Walter  Cecil  Mac- 
farren (d.  1905),  from  1846  piano-teacher  at  the  Royal  Academy  and  a varied 
writer  for  piano  and  orchestra;  the  original  and  versatile  Dutch  pianist 
Eduard  Silas,  who  came  to  England  in  1850  and  gradually  made  his  way  in 
the  face  of  the  opposition  aroused  by  his  extreme  radicalism ; the  eminent 
pianist  and  conductor  Otto  Goldschmidt  (d.  1907),  from  1852  the  husband  of 
Jenny  Lind;  Herbert  Stanley  Oakeley  (d.  1903),  from  1865  professor  at 
Edinburgh  University,  and  strong  both  as  composer  and  as  educator;  Henry 
Charles  Banister  (d.  1897),  professor  at  the  Royal  Academy  from  1851  and 
the  author  of  valuable  books  (from  1872)  ; besides  the  large  and  distin- 
guished line  of  younger  composers  whose  work  mainly  belongs  in  the  recent 
period  (see  sec.  231). 

Special  mention  should  also  be  made  of  Charles  Kensington  Salaman  (d. 
1901),  who  from  1835  was  active  in  the  organization  of  important  concert- 
series  and  societies;  the  German  Charles  Halle  (d.  1895),  from  1836  con- 
spicuous at  Paris  as  a pianist,  and  from  1848  a teacher  in  England,  becoming 
famous  from  1853  as  conductor  at  Manchester,  London  and  elsewhere; 
August  Manns  (d.  1907),  also  a German,  from  1855  conductor  at  the  Crystal 
Palace  and  of  innumerable  other  concerts  and  festivals ; William  Cusins  (d. 
1893),  from  1867  conductor  of  the  Philharmonic  concerts;  and  the  dis- 
tinguished violinist  John  Tiplady  Carrodus  (d.  1895),  prominent  in  leading 
orchestras  from  1853.  A strong  educational  influence  from  1851  was  exerted 
by  the  Austrian  Ernst  Pauer  (d.  1905),  widely  known  as  teacher,  lecturer, 
author  and  composer. 


MUSIC  IN  AMERICA 


615 


Besides  the  important  Philharmonic  Society,  founded  in  1813,  and 
the  educational  centre  in  the  Royal  Academy  of  Music , founded  in  1822, 
both  of  which  have  been  previously  mentioned  (see  sec.  186),  the  middle 
period  saw  the  establishment  of  the  significant  Sacred  Harmonic  Society , 
founded  in  1832,  and  led  till  1848  by  Joseph  Surman  (d.  1871)  and  later 
by  Costa,  and  of  the  Society  of  British  Musicians , founded  in  1834  to 
encourage  composition  by  Englishmen,  which  disbanded  in  1865.  The 
now  influential  Musical  Association , founded  in  1874,  and  the  Incorpo- 
rated Society  of  Musicians,  founded  in  1882,  belong  to  the  next  period. 

224.  Music  in  America.  — The  cultivation  of  musical  art  in 
the  United  States  along  lines  connected  with  what  was  being 
done  in  Europe  made  but  slight  progress  before  1840,  though 
performances  of  opera  and  oratorio  music  were  not  uncommon 
in  a few  leading  cities.  An  educational  influence  of  value  was 
exerted  by  the  many  leaders  in  the  improvement  of  New  Eng- 
land psalmody,  of  whom  Lowell  Mason  was  the  chief.  Grad- 
ually immigration  brought  in  many  trained  musicians  from 
across  the  ocean,  especially  under  the  stress  of  the  political 
disturbances  that  culminated  in  the  revolutions  of  1848.  More 
and  more  students  sought  instruction  in  England  or  Germany. 
Standards  of  artistic  judgment  and  action  steadily  rose  in  a few 
metropolitan  centres,  and  some  gifted  artists  began  to  appear. 
Thus  the  way  was  prepared  for  the  immense  advances  that 
followed  in  the  period  after  the  Civil  War.  Though  nearly  all 
that  is  significant  as  a part  of  the  general  history  of  music  be- 
longs to  that  later  period,  yet  the  worthy  efforts  of  many  pio- 
neers deserve  recognition,  even  though  what  they  actually  did 
is  not  absolutely  remarkable  (see  sec.  233). 

Conspicuous  instances  of  those  whose  work  centred  chiefly  in  the  old- 
fashioned  psalmody  were  Thomas  Hastings  (d.  1872),  living  at  Utica  from 
1823  and  at  New  York  from  1832;  Lowell  Mason  (d.  1872),  who  was 
immensely  influential  at  Boston  from  1827;  the  Englishman  George  James 
Webb  (d.  1887),  from  ,1830  in  Boston;  George  Frederick  Root  (d.  1895), 
from  1844  in  New  York  and  from  1859  in  Chicago;  besides  many  more, 
mostly  associated  with  Boston. 

Pioneers  of  broader  interests  were  Uriah  C.  Hill  (d.  1875),  a pupil  of  Spohr 
and  in  1842  the  founder  of  the  New  York  Philharmonic  Society;  John 
Sullivan  Dwight  (d.  1893),  in  1852  the  founder  of  the  first  important  Ameri- 
can musical  periodical  and  a careful  critic;  George  Frederick  Bristow  (d. 
1898),  violinist,  organist,  conductor  and  fertile  composer  in  New  York; 
William  Henry  Walter,  from  1842  a leading  organist  in  New  York;  John 
Henry  Cornell  (d.  1894),  from  1848  an  able  organist  and  theorist  in  New 
York;  James  Cutler  Dunn  Parker,  since  1854  similarly  known  in  Boston; 


6i6 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


Michael  Henry  Cross  (d.  1897),  from  1848  active  as  organist  and  conductor  in 
Philadelphia ; with  many  others.  The  ballad-writer  Stephen  Collins  Foster 
(d.  1864)  displayed  from  1842  a remarkable  gift  of  naive  expression. 

Of  international  reputation  later  were  the  pianist  William  Mason,  who  was 
highly  trained  in  Germany  and  since  1855  has  been  conspicuous  in  New 
York  as  a Nestor  among  teachers;  Benjamin  Johnson  Lang,  since  1852  the 
eminent  conductor  and  composer  in  Boston ; and  especially  John  Knowles 
Paine  (d.  1906),  from  1861  settled  in  Boston  and  from  1876  professor  at 
Harvard  University  — a composer  of  rich  capacity  in  all  the  greater  forms. 

Out  of  some  scores  of  foreign  musicians  who  came  to  the  United  States 
before  i860,  important  examples  were  from  1799  the  Italian  Filippo  Traetta 
(d.  1854),  a vocal  teacher  and  composer  in  New  York  and  Philadelphia; 
from  1838  in  New  Orleans  Eugene  Prosper  Prevost  (d.  1872),  and  in  New 
York  the  organist  Henry  Christian  Timm  (d.  1892),  and  Hummel’s  pupil 
William  Scharfenberg  (d.  1895)  ; from  1844  the  Irishman  Thomas  Ryan  (d. 
1903),  and  from  1847  the  Holsteiner  Wulf  Fries  (d.  1902),  who  were  long 
identified  with  the  Mendelssohn  Quintet  Club  of  Boston,  organized  in  1849; 
from  1845  New  York  the  Leipsic  pianist  Hermann  Adolf  Wollenhaupt  (d. 
1865),  and  the  fine  violinist  and  great  conductor  Theodore  Thomas  (d.  1905), 
brought  as  a boy  from  Hanover  and  soon  widely  known  as  a masterly 
educator  of  public  taste  ; from  1847  the  strong  English  pianist  Richard  Hoff- 
man; from  1848  the  violinist  Theodor  Eisfeld  (d.  1882),  the  opera-composer 
and  manager  Max  Maretzek  (d.  1897),  the  famous  Boston  conductor  Carl 
Zerrahn  (d.  1906),  the  pianist  Otto  Dresel  (d.  1890),  Hermann  Kotzschmar, 
long  prominent  in  Portland,  and  Hans  Balatka  (d.  1899),  from  1851  conductor 
at  Milwaukee  and  Chicago;  from  1849  the  Austrian  pianist  Frederic 
Brandeis  (d.  1899)  ; from  1850  the  Saxon  conductor  Karl  Bergmann  (d. 
1876),  and  the  Russian  Karl  Klauser  (d.  1905)  ; from  1852  the  singing- 
master  Julius  Eduard  Meyer  (d.  1899)  ; from  1853  the  violinists  Eduard 
Mollenhauer  and  Joseph  Mosenthal  (d.  1896),  both  pupils  of  Spohr;  from 
1854  Carl  Christian  Muller;  from  1856 the  violinist  Julius  Eichberg  (d.  1893), 
and  the  English  organist  Frederick  Herbert  Torrington,  prominent  in  Canada ; 
from  1857  the  conductor  Karl  Anschiitz  (d.  1870)  and  the  pianist  Robert 
Goldbeck  of  New  York,  Chicago  and  St.  Louis;  and  from  1859  the  eminent 
pianist  Sebastian  Bach  Mills  (d.  1898).  Many  of  these  were  composers  of 
ability,  especially  Hoffman,  Brandeis,  Muller,  Goldbeck  and  Mills.  These 
are  but  samples  of  the  influential  current  of  musical  immigration. 

The  only  strong  orchestra  organized  during  this  period  was  the  New 
York  Philharmonic , founded  in  1842.  Chamber  music  was  systematically 
presented  by  several  organizations  from  about  1850.  Important  entrances 
into  the  field  of  publishing  were  the  Boston  house  of  Ditson  in  1832, 
and  the  New  York  house  of  Schirmer  in  1848  (Kerksieg  & Breusing). 

Besides  the  attention  to  piano-making  that  has  already  been  noted  (see 
sec.  183),  reference  should  be  made  to  the  violin-makers  August  and 
Georg  Gemunder,  pupils  of  Vuillaume,  who  came  to  America  in  1846-7 
and  became  known  as  among  the  best  workmen  in  the  world. 


CHAPTER  XXXVII 


MUSICAL  EDUCATION  AND  LITERATURE 

225.  The  Conservatories. — The  middle  of  the  19th  century 
was  the  time  when  music-teaching  became  a notable  profession 
for  a multitude  of  musicians,  sometimes  working  independently, 
sometimes  banded  together  in  institutions,  sometimes  holding 
official  positions  at  courts  or  in  theatres,  opera-houses,  churches, 
etc.  To  be  a musician  has  almost  always  been  to  be  a music- 
teacher,  but  musical  pedagogy  now  became  a well-recognized 
vocation,  with  methods  reduced  to  some  system  and  with  con- 
stantly improving  apparatus. 

It  is  not  always  remembered  how  peculiarly  dependent  music  is  for 
propagation  upon  the  mediation  of  the  living  teacher  or  illustrator,  im- 
pressing himself  either  privately,  in  the  class-room,  or  in  public  per- 
formance. The  products  of  musical  art  cannot  be  displayed  as  objects  in 
a museum.  It  is  true  that  they  can  be  circulated  in  printed  form.  But 
this  latter  approach  is  effective  only  when  the  user's  mind  has  been 
prepared  by  special  study  under  teachers.  It  is  true,  also,  that  a 
knowledge  of  music  is  diffused  through  concerts,  the  opera,  church 
services  and  the  like,  reaching  people  somewhat  en  masse ; but  such 
renditions  involve  the  action  of  living  exponents,  and  their  full  impression 
is  dependent  upon  some  amount  of  personal  study.  It  is  for  reasons 
like  these  that  there  has  arisen  such  a prodigious  demand  for  instructors  in 
every  branch  of  music  — a demand  which  must  increase  in  geometrical 
ratio  as  it  is  successfully  met. 

The  success  of  the  Paris  Conservatoire  (from  1795),  combined 
with  the  growth  of  interest  in  organized  education,  led  through- 
out the  early  and  middle  19th  century  to  the  foundation  of 
many  other  institutions,  larger  or  smaller,  designed  as  technical 
music-schools.  The  main  object  of  the  Paris  institution  was  to 
supply  dramatic  composers  and  singers.  The  object  of  some 
other  schools  was  like  that  of  the  earliest  Italian  conservatories 
— to  study  Plain-Song  and  the  vocal  polyphony  required  in 
church  services.  The  object  of  the  Leipsic  conservatory  (from 
1843)  was  to  further  instrumental  composition  and  performance. 

617 


6i3 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


In  almost  all  cases,  the  departments  most  accented  were  piano- 
playing, violin-playing,  solo  and  choral  singing,  harmony  and 
the  higher  branches  of  composition.  Only  gradually  was  spe- 
cific recognition  given  to  the  need  for  genuine  musicianship  and 
of  a comprehensive  knowledge  of  musical  history,  literature  and 
criticism.  It  must  be  confessed  that  in  its  earlier  stages  the 
conservatory  idea  was  more  analogous  to  that  of  the  trade-school 
than  to  that  of  institutions  of  general  culture. 

The  lowest  type  of  conservatory  is  the  mere  cooperative  union  of 
several  teachers,  each  with  his  own  methods,  purposes  and  clientage,  who 
seek  to  profit  by  the  practical  advantages  of  consolidated  effort.  In  such 
a school  each  teacher  goes  his  own  way  and  pupils  are  not  required  to 
pursue  a curriculum.  The  latter,  however,  gain  from  the  mere  fact  of 
association  and  from  whatever  recitals,  lectures  and  the  like  can  be 
attended  by  many  auditors  at  once.  The  ideal  conservatory  is  one  in 
which  under  competent  direction  a balanced  and  progressive  curriculum 
is  provided  and  thoughtfully  adjusted  to  personal  needs,  so  that  after  a 
reasonable  period  the  student  comes  forth  not  only  equipped  for  his 
specialty,  but  with  some  determinable  amount  of  general  musicianship. 
The  difficulty  of  approaching  the  ideal  is  threefold  — the  economic 
question  of  funds  or  income,  the  lack  of  an  encyclopaedic  grasp  of  musical 
art  as  a whole  by  musicians,  and  the  natural  popular  demand  for  little 
more  than  a money-winning  musical  training. 

Measured  by  an  ideal  standard,  the  story  of  European  music-schools 
before  1865  or  thereabouts  is  honorable,  but  seldom  brilliant.  The  prob- 
lem of  funds  was  met  in  almost  every  instance  by  a governmental 
subvention,  often  on  a liberal  scale.  The  problem  of  curriculum  was 
dependent  upon  the  wisdom  of  directors,  but  competition  tended  to  force 
constant  advance.  The  problem  of  popular  demand  was  steadily  simplified 
by  the  rapid  increase  in  the  number  of  educated  musicians  and  the 
remarkable  development  of  general  interest  in  music  of  the  highest 
class. 

Since  about  i860  the  increase  in  the  number  of  conservatories 
has  been  more  than  twice  as  rapid  as  before  and  there  has  been 
a marked  improvement  in  their  pedagogical  system.  They 
have  in  some  cases  begun  to  establish  important  affiliations  with 
institutions  of  general  culture,  such  as  universities. 

The  oldest  conservatories  are  those  of  Naples  (see  sec.  91),  which  were 
consolidated  in  1808;  those  of  Venice,  which  were  not  reconstructed  on 
modern  lines  until  recently ; and  that  of  Palermo,  which  became  a state  in- 
stitution in  1863. 

By  1830,  besides  that  at  Paris  (see  sec.  177),  conservatories  had  been 
started  in  1804  at  Bologna,  in  1807  at  Milan,  in  1811  at  Prague,  in  1813 


THE  CONSERVATORIES 


619 


at  Brussels,  in  1817  at  Vienna  and  Paris  (Choron’s  Church  Music  School), 
in  1819-22  at  Berlin  (Institute  for  Church  Music),  in  1822  at  London 
(Royal  Academy),  in  1826  at  The  Hague,  in  1827  at  Liege,  in  1829  at 
Genoa  and  in  1830  at  Madrid.  That  at  Bologna  was  not  significant  till 
reorganized  in  1881  under  Luigi  Mancinelli,  followed  in  1886  by  Giuseppe 
Martucci  and  in  1902  by  Enrico  Bossi.  At  Milan  the  director  till  1814 
was  Asioli  (d.  1832),  but  the  institution  was  not  prominent  till  restored  in 
1850  by  Lauro  Rossi  (d.  1885),  succeeded  in  1872  by  Alberto  Mazzucato 
(d.  1877),  Ronchetti-Monteviti  (d.  1882),  Antonio  Bazzini  (d.  1897)  and 
G.  Gallignani.  At  Naples  the  best-known  directors  have  been  from  1837 
Zingarelli  (d.  1837)  and  from  1840  Mercadante  (d.  1870),  who  was  fol- 
lowed in  1871-8  by  Lauro  Rossi  (d.  1885).  At  Prague  the  directors  have 
been  from  1811  Dionys  Weber  (d.  1842),  in  1843-65/.  F.  Kittl  (d.  1868), 
from  1865  Josef  Krejci  (d.  1881),  in  1882-1901  Anton  Bennewitz  and  from 
1901  Karl  Knittl , assisted  by  Anton  Dvordk  (d.  1904).  At  Brussels  since 
the  reorganization  in  1832  there  have  been  two  directors,  Fetis  (d.  1871) 
and  Gevaert.  At  Vienna  the  direction  was  by  committee  till  the  appoint- 
ment in  1844-8  of  Gottfried  Preyer  (d.  1901),  followed  from  1851  by 
Joseph  Hellmesberger  (d.  1893),  Johann  Fuchs  (d.  1899)  and  Richard 
von  Perger.  (On  the  Berlin  Institut  see  sec.  219,  and  on  the  London 
Royal  Academy  see  sec.  186.)  At  The  Hague  the  list  includes  Johann 
Heinrich  Lubeck  (d.  1865),  Willejn  Nicolai  (d.  1896)  and  Henri  Viotta. 
At  Li&ge  the  standard  was  set  by  Louis  Joseph  Daussoigne-Mehul  (d. 
1875),  followed  in  1862  by  Etienne  Joseph  Soubre  (d.  1871)  and  in  1872 
by  Jean  Theodore  Radoux.  At  Genoa  the  director  since  1898  is  Giovanni 
Battista  Polleri.  At  Madrid  recent  directors  have  been  from  1 877  Arrieta 
y Cor  era  (d.  1894)  and  Monasterio  (d.  1903). 

Before  1870  this  list  was  increased  by  the  founding  of  conservatories  in 
1833  at  Ghent  and  Lisbon,  in  1843  at  Leipsic,  in  1845  at  Rotterdam,  in 
1846  at  Munich,  in  1850  at  Berlin  (Stern),  in  1855  at  Strassburg  and 
Berlin  (Kullak),  in  1856  at  Dresden  and  Stuttgart,  in  i860  at  Florence, 
in  1861  at  Warsaw,  in  1862  at  Amsterdam  and  St.  Petersburg,  in  1865  at 
Turin  and  Christiania,  in  1866  at  Moscow  and  Copenhagen,  and  in  1867 
at  Antwerp.  At  Ghent  the  directors  have  been  Martin  Joseph  Mengal 
(d.  1851),  Jean  Andries  (d.  1872),  Adolphe  Samuel  (d.  1898),  and 
Emile  Mathieu . (On  the  Leipsic  conservatory  see  sec.  196.)  Recent 
directors  at  Rotterdam  have  been  in  1865-74  Woldemar  Bargiel  (d.  1897), 
in  1874-90  Friedrich  Gernsheim , in  1890-5  Richard  von  Perger , and 
later  Sikemeyer.  At  Munich  the  list  includes  till  1865  Franz  Hauser 
(d.  1870),  in  1867-9  Billow  (d.  1894),  from  1869  Joseph  Rheinberger  (d. 
1901)  and  in  190 1-4  Bernhard  Stavenhagen.  (On  the  Stern  and  Kullak 
schools  at  Berlin  see  sec.  219.)  At  Strassburg  special  success  has  been 
won  since  1871  by  Franz  Stockhausen.  (On  Dresden  see  sec.  209.)  At 
Stuttgart  the  first  director  was  Faiszt  (d.  1894),  followed  by  Samuel  de 
Lange.  At  Florence  the  first  director  was  Baldassare  Gamucci  (d.  1892), 
and  at  present  is  Guido  Tacchinardi.  At  Warsaw  worked  Apollinaire  de 
Kontski  (d.  1879)  and  Alexander  Zarzycki  (d.  1895).  At  Amsterdam  we 
find  till  1895  Franz  Coenen  (d.  1904),  followed  by  Daniel  de  Lange. 


620 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


At  St.  Petersburg  the  series  consists  of  Anton  Rubinstein  (d.  1894),  who 
served  in  1862-7  and  again  in  1887-91,  in  1867-71  Nicolai  Zaremba  (d. 
1879),  in  1871-6  Michael  Asanchewski  (d.  1881),  in  1876-87  Karl  Davi- 
dow  (d.  1889),  in  1892-7  Julius  Johannsen  (d.  1904),  and  since  1898 
August  Bernhardt.  At  Turin  in  1868-82  Carlo  Pedrotti  (d.  1893)  was 
an  energetic  organizer,  followed  now  by  Giovanni  Bolzoni.  At  Moscow 
the  names  are  Nicolai  Rubinstein  (d.  1881),  in  1881-3  Nicolai  Hubert 
(d.  1888),  in  1883-5  Konstantin  Karl  Albrecht  (d.  1893),  in  1885-9 
Sergei  Tanejew  and  since  1889  Wassili  Safonow.  At  Antwerp  the  first 
director  was  Peter  Benoit  (d.  1901),  followed  by  Jan  Blockx. 

226.  Certain  Pedagogical  Specialties.  — Both  within  and  with- 
out the  conservatories  much  enterprise  was  shown  in  improving 
or  extending  pedagogical  organization  and  method.  Into  the 
detail  of  most  of  this  we  cannot  here  enter.  But  certain  move- 
ments deserve  mention  because  of  their  wide  effects. 

From  1800  onward,  extensive  public  school  systems  steadily 
developed  in  all  the  principal  countries,  and  in  many  cases, 
especially  in  Germany  and  France,  urgent  advocates  appeared 
for  the  practice  of  singing  as  a part  of  the  ordinary  curriculum. 
The  end  in  view  was  simply  to  give  enough  elementary  facility 
in  musical  facts  and  action  so  that  children  should  grow  up 
with  some  readiness  to  use  song  in  common  life  with  ease  and 
delight,  but  it  was  also  clearly  seen  that  the  psychological  and 
moral  effects  of  singing  upon  the  child-mind  were  valuable. 
This  general  movement  was  not  so  much  directed  by  musical 
enthusiasts  for  the  special  furtherance  of  their  art  as  made  a 
part  of  the  new  zeal  for  systematic  and  well-rounded  popular 
education.  But  in  its  gradual  development,  with  the  special 
methods,  text-books  and  literature  which  it  called  forth,  it  came 
to  have  decided  importance  in  several  countries  as  a foundation 
upon  which  artistic  progress  could  rest. 

In  Germany  this  movement  was  interlocked  with  that  which  aimed  at 
the  improvement  of  popular  song  in  church  services.  From  about  1810 
there  was  a marked  revival  of  interest  in  liturgies  in  the  Lutheran  church, 
and  hence  congregational  singing  naturally  attracted  attention.  The 
parallel  interest  in  such  singing  in  America  from  about  1820  was  slightly 
connected  with  this  German  movement. 

Plans  for  class-instruction  in  singing  raised  questions  about 
simplifying  musical  notation.  The  close  association  of  the  staff- 
notation  with  the  keyboard  had  made  its  development  more 
adapted  to  the  needs  of  playing  than  of  singing.  It  was  felt 


PEDAGOGICAL  SPECIALTIES 


621 


that  the  facts  of  scale-relationship  could  be  more  simply  pre- 
sented to  the  singer’s  mind,  so  that  essentially  the  same  rela- 
tions should  always  be  shown  by  the  same  signs.  Hence  came 
the  invention  of  systems  in  which  either  numerals  or  letters 
were  used  to  indicate  where  in  the  scale  the  tones  desired  were 
situated.  The  pictorial  element  in  the  staff-notation  was  sacri- 
ficed to  gain  precision  of  tonal  thought.  Out  of  many  experi- 
ments two  systems  of  notation  were  evolved  — that  of  Galin  or 
Cheve  and  that  known  as  the  ‘Tonic  Sol-Fa’  — which  have  de- 
monstrated their  utility  in  France  and  England  respectively,  not 
as  complete  substitutes  for  the  staff-notation,  but  as  helps  to  the 
right  use  of  that  notation  or  as  means  for  rudimentary  teaching. 
Both  systems  were  gradually  improved  until  they  were  capable 
of  showing  all  sorts  of  time-relations  and  all  ordinary  intricacies 
of  modulation.  Both  gained  power  through  the  minute  study 
of  methods  of  teaching  and  the  preparation  of  systematic  text- 
books. The  practical  success  of  the  Tonic  Sol-Fa  movement  in 
England  has  been  prodigious,  exercising  a large  influence  upon 
the  whole  musical  culture  of  the  nation. 

Reference  to  these  matters  calls  up  the  fact  that  during  this 
period  there  was  a constant  multiplication  of  special  ‘ methods  * 
for  teaching  particular  musical  branches,  especially  on  the  part 
of  leading  teachers  in  the  conservatories.  All  these  testified  to 
the  care  with  which  pedagogical  processes  were  being  scrutinized 
and  the  system  that  was  becoming  characteristic  of  technical 
training.  Hence  the  rate  of  advance  among  pupils  was  greatly 
accelerated  and  at  the  same  time  the  results  made  better.  This 
was  specially  conspicuous  in  the  acquisition  of  keyboard  and 
vocal  technique.  The  number  of  expert  trainers  in  piano-play- 
ing and  singing  increased  everywhere,  constituting  two  groups 
of  specialists  who  were  constantly  bringing  out  well-equipped 
performers.  The  only  untoward  result  of  this  activity  was  the 
confusion  often  introduced  into  the  minds  of  students  and  the 
public  between  technical  proficiency  in  execution  and  genuinely 
broad  musicianship. 

Among  the  pioneers  in  promoting  popular  singing  were  the  following  : — 

Hans  Georg  Nageli  (d.  1836),  a music-publisher  of  repute  near  Zurich,  was 
one  of  the  first  to  agitate  for  school  music.  He  was  the  head  of  a Swiss 
society  for  promoting  popular  song,  a strong  advocate  of  the  methods  of 
Pestalozzi,  a practical  teacher  and  author  of  several  manuals  (from  1812). 


622 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


About  the  same  time  worked  Bernhard  Christian  Ludwig  Natorp  (d.  1846),  a 
Lutheran  clergyman  and  pedagogue,  from  1808  at  Potsdam  and  from  1819  at 
Munster  (books  from  1813)  ; and  Johann  Friedrich  Naue  (d.  1858),  musical 
director  at  Halle  University  (books  from  1818).  Other  names  in  Germany 
are  from  1815  Johann  Heinrich  Goroldt  of  Quedlinburg  (d.  after  1835)  and 
Friedrich  Silcher  (d.  i860)  of  Tubingen  University;  from  about  1820  Johann 
August  Gunther  Heinroth  (d.  1846),  Forkel’s  successor  at  Gottingen  University, 
Gottfried  Emil  Fischer  of  Berlin  (d.  1841)  and  Xaver  Schnyder  von  Wartensee 
of  Frankfort  (d.  1868)  ; from  1823  Christian  Urban  of  Danzig;  from  1828 
Karl  Schade  of  Quedlinburg  (d.  after  1835)  ; and  later  Ludwig  Erk  (d.  1883), 
long  famous  at  Berlin.  To  the  efforts  of  these  and  others  was  due  the  exten- 
sive pursuit  of  music  in  schools  and  churches  as  a specialty. 

In  France  Alexandre  Choron  (d.  1834),  a highly  educated  scholar,  was 
active  from  about  1810  in  improving  choir-schools  and  from  1817  through  his 
notable  Church  Music  School.  In  the  conduct  of  this  enterprise,  till  checked 
by  the  Revolution  of  1830,  he  laid  the  foundation  for  all  the  later  French  pro- 
jects for  popularizing  musical  knowledge,  preparing  many  excellent  text-books 
(from  1811).  Another  leader,  of  even  greater  practical  importance,  was 
Guillaume  Louis  Wilhem  [Bocquillon]  (d.  1842),  who  from  1810  taught  in  the 
Lycde  Napoleon  with  such  success  that  from  1819  he  was  made  supervisor  in 
the  Paris  primary  schools.  Out  of  his  numerous  classes  grew  in  1833  the 
Orphdon  movement  (see  sec.  218). 

It  was  in  connection  with  Wilhem’s  work  that  the  ‘ meloplaste  ’ system,  in- 
vented before  1818  by  Pierre  Galin  of  Bordeaux  (d.  1821),  came  into  notice. 
This  was  the  first  practical  application  of  numerals  for  notes.  The  system 
was  advanced  by  Joseph  Francois  Snel  (d.  1861),  Edouard  Jue  (works  from 
1823),  and  especially  by  Aim6  Paris  (d.  1866),  who  added  a method  for 
teaching  time-patterns,  and  later  by  Emile  Chev6  (d.  1864),  who  brought 
the  whole  to  a complete  statement  (1850). 

In  England  popular  instruction  by  classes  was  urged  as  early  as  1810  by 
Joseph  Kemp  (d.  1824),  previously  organist  at  Bristol.  But  their  first  large 
application  was  in  1841  under  John  Hullah  (d.  1884),  a very  successful  imi- 
tator of  Wilhem,  whose  activity  as  teacher  and  author  continued  till  1880. 
From  his  system  was  derived  the  present  organization  of  English  school- 
teaching in  singing.  Another  active  teacher  was  Joseph  Mainzer  (d.  1851), 
vocal  instructor  in  schools,  from  1841  at  Manchester. 

The  Tonic  Sol-Fa  system  was  first  outlined  about  1840  by  Sarah  Ann 
Glover  (d.  1867),  a teacher  at  Norwich;  but  its  development  was  due  to 
John  Curwen  (d.  1880),  a clergyman  of  Plaistow.  The  latter  carefully  per- 
fected details  of  notation,  teacher-training  and  publication,  and  from  about 
1855  the  propagation  of  the  method  through  classes  and  associations  was 
rapid. 

It  is  extraordinary  with  what  bitterness  almost  every  one  of  these  efforts  to 
popularize  music  was  opposed  by  musicians.  Teaching  by  classes  doubtless 
involved  difficulties,  and  each  particular  movement  used  novel  methods  that 
were  somewhat  debatable ; but  these  facts  do  not  excuse  the  hostility  often 
displayed. 


PEDAGOGICAL  SPECIALTIES 


623 


Soon  after  1810  Johann  Bernhard  Logier  (d.  1846),  then  organist  at  West- 
port,  Ireland,  invented  the  ‘ chiroplast,’  a mechanical  aid  in  securing  a good 
hand-position  in  piano-playing.  This  device  was  for  a time  extensively  popu- 
lar, not  only  in  England,  but  in  Germany  and  France.  Logier  also  advocated 
teaching  piano-playing  through  simultaneous  class-practice.  Both  parts  of 
his  system  were  strongly  criticized  and  neither  of  them  has  persisted  in  use  as 
proposed.  Friedrich  Kalkbrenner  (d.  1849)  and  Franz  Stopel  (d.  1836)  were 
leading  representatives  of  Logier’s  ideas  at  Berlin  and  Paris. 

As  prominent  illustrations  of  the  many  vocal  specialists  may  be  enumerated 
Johann  Aloys  Miksch  of  Dresden  (d.  1845)  ; Marco  Bordogni  of  Paris  (d. 
1856)  ; Niccolb  Vaccai  (d.  1848),  successively  at  Venice,  Trieste,  Vienna, 
Paris,  London  and  Milan;  Franz  Hauser  of  Vienna  and  Munich  (d.  1870); 
Panseron  of  Paris  (d.  1859)  ; Gaetano  Nava  of  Milan  (d.  1875)  ; Manuel 
Garcia  of  Paris  (d.  1906),  the  inventor  of  the  laryngoscope  ; Duprez  of  Paris 
(d.  1896);  Heinrich  Panofka  of  London,  Paris  and  Florence  (d.  1887); 
Baltasar  Saldoni  of  Madrid  (d.  1890)  ; Giuseppe  Concone  of  Paris  (d.  1861)  ; 
Francesco  Lamperti  of  Milan  (d.  1892) ; Bordese  of  Paris  (d.  1886)  ; Sieber 
of  Dresden  and  Berlin  (d.  1895)  ; Salvatore  Marchesi  and  his  wife  Mathilde 
(Graumann)  Marchesi  of  Vienna  and  Paris;  Julius  Stockhausen  (d.  1906), 
latterly  of  Frankfort;  Enrico  Delle  Sedie  of  Paris;  Pinsuti  of  London  (d. 
1888)  ; and  Julius  Hey  of  Munich  and  now  Berlin,  the  foremost  exponent  of 
Wagnerian  vocalism  (see  sec.  222). 

227.  Historical  Studies.  — In  this  period  the  modern  spirit 
of  scholarship  became  engaged  in  earnest  upon  the  problems 
of  music-history.  At  various  places  original  research  was  pros- 
ecuted, usually  by  those  in  close  contact  with  large  libraries. 
Manuscript  music  and  other  data  were  here  and  there  collected, 
collated  and  sometimes  published.  Civil  and  ecclesiastical 
records  began  to  be  systematically  searched  for  statistical  facts, 
and  the  musical  annals  of  localities,  institutions  and  branches 
of  effort  to  be  compiled.  Investigation  of  the  sources  thus  pro- 
vided the  materials  for  sound  history.  Out  of  this  study  emerged 
a much  more  just  and  ample  conception  of  the  successive  stages 
in  musical  progress  and  of  the  factors  at  work  in  it.  Fresh 
and  valuable  classifications,  generalizations  and  appraisements 
began  to  accumulate.  It  was  not  until  after  1850  that  the  re- 
sults began  to  show  in  many  comprehensive  manuals,  but  be- 
fore that  time  the  work  of  research  was  actively  undertaken. 
Each  decade  since  has  witnessed  the  rapid  enlargement  of 
musical  scholarship,  until  now  its  magnitude  baffles  description 
or  easy  comprehension  by  any  single  mind. 

The  fields  of  investigation  were  found  throughout  the  whole 
historic  sequence  — especially  Greek  music,  Plain-Song,  the 


624 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


epoch  of  the  Netherlanders,  the  16th  century,  the  evolution  of 
the  opera,  advances  in  theory,  the  development  of  instruments, 
etc.  It  was  too  early  for  students  to  frame  accurate  notions  of 
the  drifts  of  the  19th  century.  These  were  still  mostly  under 
the  review  of  criticism  rather  than  of  history.  But  the  his- 
torians followed  hard  upon  the  critics. 

Francois  Joseph  F6tis  (d.  1871)  was  the  most  important  of  the  scholars  in 
the  early  part  of  the  century,  and  the  first  of  the  illustrious  Belgian  line  of 
investigators.  Born  at  Mons  in  1784,  he  showed  precocious  talent  in  playing 
and  composing,  and  had  excellent  instruction  at  Paris  and  Vienna.  Before 
he  was  20  he  had  published  ambitious  compositions,  and  had  begun  to  study 
early  mediaeval  theory  and  notation.  From  1806  he  took  up  the  systematic 
criticism  of  Gregorian  music  with  a view  to  its  thorough  reform.  From  1811 
he  was  deeply  engaged  upon  the  modern  system  of  harmony  as  distinct  from 
that  of  Rameau  and  his  followers.  From  1813  he  was  organist  and  teacher  at 
Douai,  but  in  1818  went  to  Paris,  working  partly  as  a composer  (7  operas, 
1820-32),  and  from  1821  being  on  the  Conservatoire  staff.  His  manual  of 
counterpoint  (1824),  his  notable  magazine,  La  revue  7nusicale  (1827-35),  a 
significant  essay  on  the  Netherlanders  (1828),  and  his  courses  of  historical 
lectures  (1832),  made  him  a leader.  From  1833  for  nearly  40  years  he  was 
director  of  the  reorganized  Brussels  conservatory,  court-choirmaster  and  con- 
cert-conductor. His  greatest  literary  work  was  the  Biographie  universelle 
(1835-44),  later  revised  (1860-5)  with  the  help  of  Aristide  Farre?ic  (d.  1865) 
and  again  augmented  (1878-80)  by  Arthur  Pougin — the  first  of  the  great 
biographical  dictionaries.  He  began  a comprehensive  Histoire  (5  vols.,  to 
the  15th  century,  1869-76),  wrote  monographs  on  Paganini  (1851),  on 
Stradivari  (1856)  and  on  the  instruments  in  the  Expositions  of  1855  and  1867, 
and  prepared  an  extensive  list  of  text-books  for  singers,  pianists,  choirmasters, 
conductors  and  composers.  From  time  to  time  he  continued  to  compose  for 
the  church  and  the  orchestra.  His  accuracy  has  proved  defective  and  his 
judgment  was  not  always  unbiased,  but  the  general  value  of  his  works  and 
the  vigorous  stimulus  they  gave  are  beyond  question. 

Among  those  who  specialized  upon  Greek  music  were  from  1818  Friedrich 
von  Drieberg  (d.  1856),  Prussian  court-chamberlain,  whose  conclusions  have 
won  small  acceptance ; in  1840-7  Friedrich  Bellermann  (d.  1874),  from  1847 
director  of  one  of  the  Berlin  gymnasia;  in  1846  Karl  Fortlage  of  Jena  (d. 
1881)  ; from  1854  Rudolf  Westphal  (d.  1892),  an  authority  on  rhythmics  and 
metrics,  who  taught  at  Tubingen,  Breslau,  Jena,  etc.;  and  from  1866  Oscar 
Paul  of  Leipsic  (d.  1898). 

Gregorian  music  attracted  extensive  study,  leading  to  a full  reconstruction 
of  the  practical  system  on  a historical  basis.  Among  the  many  writers  may 
be  named  from  1829  Theodore  Joseph  de  Vroye  (d.  1873)  of  the  Li£ge 
Cathedral;  from  1836  the  Paris  choirmaster  Adrien  Lenoir  de  Lafage  (d. 
1862),  who  also  began  a general  history  (1844),  wrote  many  biographical 
sketches,  and  started  a Plain-Song  periodical  (1859);  from  1840  ‘Theodore 
Nisard’  [T.  E.  X.  Normand],  another  industrious  Parisian  student;  from 


HISTORICAL  STUDIES 


625 


1841  Joseph  Louis  d’  Ortigue  (d.  1866),  also  of  Paris  ; from  1840  Pietro  Alfieri 
(d.  1863)  of  the  English  College  at  Rome;  in  1844-9  the  Paris  organist 
F61ix  Danjou  (d.  1866),  who  discovered  the  Montpellier  antiphonary;  in 
1848-54  Edmond  Duval  of  Mechlin,  whose  views  were  hotly  contested;  the 
Jesuit  Louis  Lambillotte  (d.  1855),  the  interpreter  of  the  St.  Gall  antiphonary 
(1851),  but  not  generally  accepted  as  a practical  reformer;  in  1852-5  J.  G. 
Mettenleiter  of  Ratisbon  (d.  1858)  ; in  1852-9  the  Parisian  composer  and 
patron  Marie  DesirS  Beaulieu  (d.  1863)  ; in  1852-62  the  Abbe  F.  Raillard 
(d.  ? ),  teacher  at  Nimes  and  Juilly;  in  1854-61  Felix  Clement  (d.  1885)  ; 
in  1856  Francois  Auguste  Gevaert  of  Ghent,  who  reentered  the  field  much 
later  with  epoch-making  treatises  (1890-5);  in  1858  Anselm  Schubiger  of 
Einsiedeln  (d.  1888) ; and  from  1865  F.  X.  Haberl  of  Ratisbon.  The 
founder  of  the  now  famous  Solesmes  group  of  Gregorian  specialists  was 
Prosper  GuSranger  (d.  1875),  Benedictine  abbot  there  (works  from  1835), 
from  whom  Joseph  Pothier  and  Andre  Mocquereau  derived  the  impulse  and 
method  of  their  recent  remarkable  studies  (from  1880). 

Karl  von  Winterfeld  (d.  1852),  born  in  1784,  from  1816  judge  at  Breslau 
and  from  1832  supreme-court  judge  at  Berlin,  was  one  of  the  earliest  of  the 
erudite  students  of  the  older  church  music.  His  works  include  monographs 
on  Palestrina  (1832),  on  Giovanni  Gabrieli  (1834),  and  on  evangelical  church 
music  (1840-62),  all  of  masterly  scope  and  method.  Valuable  publications 
in  the  choral  field  were  made  from  1830  by  Emmanuel  Christian  Gottlieb 
Langbecker  of  Berlin  (d.  1843)  5 I%32  by  Heinrich  August  Hoffmann  of 

Breslau  (d.  1874) ; from  1847  by  Eduard  Emil  Koch  of  Heilbronn  (d. 
1871)  ; and  in  1852  by  Gottfried  Doring  of  Elbing  (d.  1869). 

Edmond  Henri  de  Coussemaker  (d.  1876),  born  in  1805  in  northern  France 
and  by  profession  a judge  there,  was  led  by  Fetis’  writings  to  adopt  historical 
work.  He  published  invaluable  monographs  on  Hucbald  (1841),  mediaeval 
instruments  (1845),  the  rise  of  polyphony  (from  1852),  the  mediaeval  drama 
(1861),  and  Adam  de  la  Hale  (1872),  besides  superb  collections  of  mediaeval 
documents  (1864-76).  With  him  maybe  grouped  many  others  in  the  Belgian 
(and  Dutch)  series,  such  as  from  1840  Florent  Corneille  Kist  of  The  Hague  (d. 
1863)  ; from  1846  Joseph  Karel  Boers  of  Nymwegen  and  Delft  (d.  1896)  ; 
Edmond  Vanderstraeten  (d.  1895),  at  first  of  Ghent  and  from  1857  in  the 
Brussels  library,  whose  works  (from  1851)  on  music  in  the  Netherlands  are 
of  extreme  value,  especially  the  collection  of  historic  masterpieces  (1867-85)  ; 
from  i860  Xavier  Victor  van  Elewyck  (d.  1888),  cathedral-choirmaster  at 
Louvain;  from  i860,  also,  Edouard  Gregoir  of  Antwerp  (d.  1890);  from 
1862  the  Chevalier  Burbure  de  Wessembeek  (d.  1889),  a specialist  on 
Antwerp  history;  and  the  composer  Francois  Auguste  Gevaert,  from  1857  at 
Ghent  and  from  1871  head  of  the  Brussels  conservatory  (chief  historical 
works  since  1875). 

Various  mediaeval  topics  were  treated  from  1821  by  Gottfried  Wilhelm  Fink 
of  Leipsic  (d.  1846)  ; from  1826  by  Raphael  Georg  Kiesewetter  (d.  1850), 
who  wrote  on  the  Netherlanders,  the  origin  of  European  music,  Guido,  the 
beginnings  of  secular  music,  Arabic  music,  etc. ; in  1836-8  by  Auguste  Bottle 
de  Toulmon  (d.  1850),  librarian  of  the  Paris  Conservatoire;  from  1841  by 
Pietro  Alfieri  of  Rome  (d.  1863),  with  fine  collections  of  Palestrina  and 


626 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


many  scattered  articles  ; from  1846  by  Edward  Francis  Rimbault  of  London 
(d.  1876),  an  indefatigable  student  of  every  phase  of  old  music  in  England; 
in  1854-5  by  Francesco  Caffi  (d.  1874),  the  historian  of  St.  Mark’s  in  Venice; 
in  1858  by  Heinrich  Bellermann  of  Berlin  (d.  1903),  writing  on  time-notation. 

The  development  of  French  music  was  followed  from  1820  by  Francois 
Blaze  [‘  Cistil-Blaze  ’]  (d.  1857),  and  by  Joseph  Louis  d’Ortigue  (d.  1866). 
After  i860  came  the  voluminous  studies  of  Arthur  Pougin,  Antoine  Ernest 
Roquet  Erneste  Thoinan  ’]  (d.  1894),  Adolphe  Gustave  Chouquet  (d.  1886), 
and  F61ix  Clement  (d.  1885). 

Various  topics  in  dramatic  and  operatic  progress  were  discussed  in 
1849-62  by  Moritz  Fiirstenau  (d.  1889),  writing  on  Dresden;  in  1852-72 
by  Ernst  Pasqu6  (d.  1892),  on  Darmstadt  and  Frankfort;  on  Berlin  in 
1852  by  Louis  Schneider  (d.  1878);  on  early  German  opera  in  1855  by 
Otto  Lindner  of  Berlin  (d.  1867)  ; on  both  German  and  French  topics  from 
1863  by  Michel  Schletterer  of  Augsburg  (d.  1893)  ; and  on  Munich  in  1867 
by  Karl  von  Perfall  (d.  1907).  Here  maybe  added  studies  from  1867  on 
music  in  Bologna  by  Gaetano  Gaspari  (d.  1881),  and  in  1868  on  the  Imperial 
Chapel  at  Vienna  by  Ludwig  von  Kochel  (d.  1877).  On  the  growth  of  music 
in  particular  countries  maybe  noted  works  in  1852  on  Prussia  by  Gottfried 
Doring  of  Elbing  (d.  1869);  in  1853-67  on  Spain  by  Mariano  Soriano- 
Fuertes  of  Barcelona  (d.  1880)  ; and  in  1859  on  Polish  opera  by  Moritz  Kara- 
sowski  (d.  1892). 

Concerning  special  forms  there  were  works  in  1841  on  the  mediaeval  lais, 
sequences,  etc.,  by  Ferdinand  Wolf  of  the  Vienna  Library  (d.  1866)  ; in  1846, 
on  the  keyboard-sonata  by  Faiszt  of  Stuttgart  (d.  1894)  ; in  1840  on  German 
Hausmusik  by  K.  F.  Becker  of  Leipsic  (d.  1877)  ; in  1853  on  the  oratorio  by 
Chrysander  of  Berlin  (d.  1901)  ; in  1859  on  Russian  church  music  by  Alexis 
Lwoff  (d.  1871) ; in  1861  on  Gipsy  music  by  Liszt  (d.  1886)  ; from  1861  on 
the  German  Lied  by  Reissmann  of  Berlin  (d.  1903)  and  by  K.  E.  Schneider 
of  Dresden  (d.  1893)  ; and  in  1863  on  piano  music  by  K.  F.  Weitzmann  of 
Berlin  (d.  1880). 

Organ-building  was  handled  from  1833  by  Topfer  of  Weimar  (d.  1870); 
from  1839  by  Christian  Friedrich  Gottlieb  Wilke  (d.  1848)  ; in  1843  by 
Johann  Julius  Seidel  of  Breslau  (d.  1856);  in  1849  by  Marie  Pierre  Hamel 
of  Beauvais  (d.  after  1870)  ; in  1855  by  David  Hermann  Engel  of  Merseburg 
(d.  18 77);  in  1855  by  E.  J.  Hopkins  (d.  1901)  and  E.  F.  Rimbault  (d. 
1876);  and  in  1859  by  Jean  Bertrand  of  Paris  (d.  1880).  Piano-making 
was  similarly  discussed  in  1853  by  Joseph  Fischhof  of  Vienna  (d.  1857)  ; in 
i860  by  Rimbault ; in  1868  by  Edgar  Brinsmead ; and  in  1869  by  Oscar  Paul 
of  Leipsic  (d.  1898).  Somewhat  comprehensive  studies  of  instrument-making 
were  put  forth  from  1857  by  the  Marquis  de  PontScoulant  of  Paris  (d.  1882)  ; 
by  Edmund  Schebek  of  Prague  (d.  1895)  ; by  Jules  Gallay  of  Paris  (d.  1897)  ; 
and  by  Karl  Engel  of  London  (d.  1882)  — all  these  being  drawn  out  by  the 
Expositions  of  1855  and  later. 

From  the  work  of  these  many  specialists  grew  undertakings  of  a more 
comprehensive  character.  Here  belong  works  from  1848  by  Franz  Brendel 
of  Leipsic  (d.  1868).  But  to  August  Wilhelm  Ambros  of  Vienna  (d.  1876) 


HISTORICAL  STUDIES 


627 


belongs  the  honor  of  beginning  from  1861  a monumental  general  history, 
which  has  since  been  continued  by  other  hands.  Other  useful  scholars  in 
this  field  were  from  1856  Emil  Naumann  (d.  1888)  and  from  1861  August 
Reissmann  (d.  1903),  both  of  Berlin. 

From  the  multitude  of  biographical  sketches  and  monographs  issued 
between  1830  and  1870  the  following  examples  may  be  selected  as  illustrating 
the  manifold  lines  of  investigation:  — Angelo  Catelani  of  Modena  (d.  1866) 
made  studies  of  A.  and  N.  Vicentino  (1851),  Petrucci  (1856),  Orazio  Vecchi 
(1858),  Merulo  (i860)  and  Stradella  (1866).  Petrucci  was  also  treated  in 
1845  by  Anton  Schmid  of  Vienna  (d.  1857)  ; and  Stradella  in  1866  by  Paulin 
Richard  of  Paris.  Palestrina  and  Giovanni  Gabrieli  were  discussed  by  Von 
Winterfeld  (see  above);  and  Lassus  in  1836  by  Henri  Florent  Delmotte  of 
Mons  (d.  1836),  in  1838  by  Auguste  Mathieu  of  Brussels,  and  in  1841  by  Kist  of 
Utrecht ; and  Sweelinck  in  1859-60  by  Richard  Hoi  of  Amsterdam  (d.  1904). 
Concerning  Bach,  appeared  works  in  1850  by  Karl  Hermann  Bitter  of  Berlin 
(d.  1885),  who  also  wrote  on  Bach’s  sons,  and  from  1873  by  Philipp  Spitta  of 
Berlin  (d.  1894) — the  standard  work  ; and  concerning  Handel  in  1857  by 
Victor  Scholcher  (d.  1893),  and  from  1858  by  Friedrich  Chrysander  of  Berlin 
(d.  1901)  — another  standard  work.  Haydn  was  treated  at  Vienna  in  1861  by 
Theodor  Georg  von  Karajan  (d.  1873),  in  1861  by  Konstantin  Wiirzbach  (d. 
1893),  and  especially  from  1867  by  Karl  Ferdinand  Pohl  (d.  1887).  Mozart 
was  studied  in  1844  by  the  Russian  Alexander  Ulibischew  (d.  1858),  in  1875 
by  Edward  Holmes  of  London  (d.  1859),  in  1856-9  with  greatest  fullness  by 
Otto  Jahn  of  Bonn  (d.  1869),  in  1862-4  by  Ludwig  von  Kochel  of  Vienna  (d. 
1877),  in  1865  by  Ludwig  Nohl  of  Heidelberg  (d.  1885),  in  1868  by  Moritz 
Karasowski  of  Dresden  (d.  1892),  and  in  1869  by  Wiirzbach.  Gluck  was 
treated  in  1854  by  Anton  Schmid  of  Vienna  (d.  1857)  and  in  1863  by  Marx  of 
Berlin  (d.  1866).  Beethoven  literature  was  developed  in  1838  by  Franz  Ger- 
hard Wegeler  of  Coblentz  (d.  1848)  and  Ferdinand  Ries  of  Frankfort  (d. 
1838),  in  1840-2  by  Anton  Schindler  of  Vienna  (d.  1864),  from  1852  by 
Wilhelm  von  Lenz  of  St.  Petersburg  (d.  1883),  in  1858  by  Marx  of  Berlin,  in 
1862  by  Edouard  Gregoir  of  Antwerp  (d.  1890),  and  especially  from  1864  by 
Nohl  of  Heidelberg,  Martin  Gustav  Nottebohm  of  Vienna  (d.  1882),  and  the 
American  Alexander  Wheelock  Thayer  (d.  1897).  Weber  was  described  in 
1862  by  Hippolyte  Barbedette  (d.  1901),  and  especially  in  1864-8  by  his  son 
Max  Maria  von  Weber.  Schubert  was  considered  from  1861  by  Heinrich 
Kreissle  von  Hellborn  of  Vienna  (d.  1869)  and  others;  Mendelssohn  in  1848 
by  Wilhelm  Adolf  Lampadius  of  Leipsic  (d.  1892),  in  1850  by  Julius  Benedict 
of  London  (d.  1885),  in  1866  by  Julius  Schubring  and  in  1869  by  Eduard 
Devrient;  and  Schumann  in  1858  by  Joseph  von  Wasielewski  of  Dresden 
(d.  1896). 

To  these  might  be  added  very  numerous  works  of  varying  merit  on  many 
opera-writers  and  virtuosi,  especially  those  associated  with  Paris.  In  the  field 
of  special  biography  Pougin  of  Paris  and  Reissmann  of  Berlin  had  already 
become  conspicuous  before  1870. 

Autobiographies  or  reminiscences  appeared  in  1833  from  the  organist 
Rinck;  in  1847  from  the  opera-writer  Konradin  Kreutzer;  about  1857  from 


628 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


the  pedagogue  Czerny  : in  1859  from  the  theorist  Lobe  ; in  1 860-1  from  the 

violinist  Spohr;  in  1865  from  the  theorist  Marx;  and  in  1870  from  both 
Lowe  and  Berlioz. 

Dictionaries  of  varying  size  and  value  were  put  forth  in  1835  by  August 
Gath y of  Hamburg  (d.  1858);  in  1835-8  by  Gustav  Schilling  of  Stuttgart 
(d.  1881)  ; in  1844  by  Marie  and  L6on  Escudier  of  Paris  (d.  1880,  ’8 1)  ; in 
1849  by  Ferdinand  Simon  Gassner  of  Darmstadt  (d.  1851);  in  1856-61  by 
Eduard  Bernsdorf  of  Leipsic  (d.  1901)  ; and  in  1865  by  Arrey  von  Dommer 
of  Hamburg  (d.  1905).  Much  more  important  than  any  of  these  was  the 
great  work  of  F6tis  in  1835-44  (2d  ed.,  1860-5). 

Here  may  be  added  some  of  the  many  periodicals  founded  during  the 
period,  such  as  in  1824-48  Gottfried  Weber’s  Cacilia,  from  1827  Fdtis’  Revue 
musicale , later  merged  in  the  Revue  et  gazette  musicale , from  1834  Schumann’s 
epoch-making  Neue  Zeitschrift  fur  Musik , from  1835  the  Paris  Menestrel  and 
the  London  Musical  World,  from  1843  the  important  Signale  fur  die  nuisika- 
lische  Welt,  from  1844  the  London  Musical  Times,  from  1845  the  Milan 
Gazzetta  musicale,  from  1847  the  Neue  Berliner  Musikzeitung ; from  1851  the 
Berlin  Echo  and  the  Vienna  Monatsschrift  fur  Theater  und  Musik,  from  i860 
Tart  musicale,  from  1862  the  London  Musical  Standard,  and  from  1869 
Eitner’s  Monatshefte  fur  Musikgeschichte. 

228.  Theorists  and  Critics.  — The  distinctively  modern  views 
of  harmony  and  counterpoint  began  to  take  shape  only  from 
about  1840.  They  arose  from  two  sources.  The  more  specu- 
lative theorists  felt  that  current  definitions,  classifications 
and  rules  should  be  simplified  and  to  some  extent  restated.  And 
the  more  radical  composers,  like  Wagner  and  many  others, 
were  instinctively  expanding  procedure  in  all  directions  so  vigor- 
ously that  they  were  making  the  accepted  authorities  obsolete. 
In  harmony,  the  most  striking  advance  was  represented  by  the 
Leipsic  master  Hauptmann,  whose  analysis  of  chords  in  rela- 
tion to  tonality  and  to  the  antithesis  between  major  and  minor 
marked  an  epoch.  In  counterpoint,  there  was  no  marked 
change  in  formal  theory  until  the  next  period,  though  practice 
was  departing  widely  from  the  usual  standards.  Naturally,  the 
vast  increase  of  institutions  for  formal  musical  education  brought 
into  notice  many  thoughtful  teachers  of  musical  science  and 
structure,  who  embodied  their  methods  in  various  text-books, 
often  of  considerable  magnitude.  Toward  the  end  of  the 
period  attempts  were  made  to  reconstruct  harmonic  thought 
upon  a chromatic  basis,  but  these  were  principally  useful  in 
calling  attention  to  infelicities  of  detail  in  the  usual  doctrines 
of  chromatic  tones  and  the  transformation  of  chords. 


THEORY  AND  CRITICISM 


629 


The  interrelations  of  music  with  physics,  physiology  and 
aesthetics  continued  to  be  studied  more  or  less,  usually  by  those 
not  otherwise  engaged  in  musical  work.  In  all  these  fields  sub- 
stantial progress  was  made  in  adjusting  thought  about  music  to 
modern  views  of  natural  science  and  of  psychology. 

In  the  domain  of  criticism,  a veritable  revolution  set  in  with 
the  work  of  Schumann  on  the  one  side  (see  sec.  192)  and  that 
of  Wagner,  Berlioz  and  Liszt  on  the  other.  Late  in  the  period 
appeared  the  powerful  Viennese  critic  Hanslick,  taking  his  stand 
against  what  seemed  to  him  the  dangerous  radicalism  of  the  latter 
group.  Two  notable  features  of  publication  were,  first,  the  fre- 
quency of  rational  analyses  of  masterpieces  as  to  structure  and 
content,  and,  second,  the  violent  combat  over  Wagnerism  and  the 
* new  ’ schools  generally.  The  former  was  intimately  connected 
with  historical  and  theoretical  advances.  The  latter  was  the  in- 
evitable concomitant  of  a revolutionary  transition  in  artistic 
method,  and  gradually  died  out  as  musical  thought  adjusted  itself 
to  new  ideas. 

The  earlier  theorists  of  the  period  were  from  1832  Anton  Andr6  of  Offen- 
bach (d.  1842)  ; from  1836  Fink  of  Leipsic  (d.  1846)  ; from  1837  Marx  of 
Berlin  (d.  1866)  ; and  from  1840  Dehn  of  Berlin  (d.  1858). 

From  1844  appeared  Fetis  of  Brussels  (d.  1871)  ; in  1845  Alfred  Day  of 
London  (d.  1849)  ? from  1846  Lobe  of  Leipsic  (d.  1881) ; in  1853-4 
Sechter  of  Vienna  (d.  1867)  ; from  1853  E.  F.  Richter  of  Leipsic  (d.  1879)  5 
from  1853  Weitzmann  of  Berlin  (d.  1880)  ; from  1854  Hauptmann  of  Leipsic 
(d.  1868);  from  i860  G.  A.  Macfarren  of  London  (d.  1887);  from  i860, 
representing  the  chromatic  school,  Heinrich  Joseph  Vincent  of  Vienna  (d. 
1901)  ; from  1862  N.  H.  Reber  of  Paris  (d.  1880)  ; from  1866  Arthur  von 
Oettingen  of  Dorpat;  from  1867  Ludwig  Bussler  of  Berlin  (d.  1901)  ; from 
1868  Ouseley  of  Hereford  (d.  1889)  ; and  from  1868  Otto  Tiersch  of  Berlin 
(d.  1892). 

In  acoustics,  contributions  were  made  from  1827  by  Charles  Edouard  Joseph 
Delezenne  of  Lille  (d.  1866)  ; from  1834  by  Karl  Franz  Emil  Schafhautl  of 
Munich  (d.  1890)  ; from  1846  by  Moritz  Wilhelm  Drobisch  of  Leipsic  (d. 
1896)  ; from  1853  by  Heinrich  Welcker  von  Gontershausen  (d.  1873)  5 in 
1 85 5 by  Friedrich  Zamminer  of  Giessen  (d.  1856)  ; from  1859  by  Charles 
Meerens  of  Bruges;  from  1863  conspicuously  by  Hermann  Helmholtz  of 
Heidelberg  and  Berlin  (d.  1894)  ; and  from  1864  by  Alexander  John  Ellis 
of  London  (d.  1890). 

Vocal  physiology  was  scientifically  treated  from  1833  by  Johannes  Muller 
of  Berlin  (d.  1858);  in  1839  by  Heinrich  Haser  of  Jena  (d.  1885);  from 
1846  by  L.  A.  Segond  of  Paris;  and  from  1856  by  Karl  Ludwig  Merkel  of 
Leipsic. 


630  THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 

Musical  aestheticians  included  from  1832  G.  T.  Fechner  of  Leipsic  (d. 
1887);  from  1837  Ferdinand  Gotthelf  Hand  of  Jena  (d.  1851);  from  1838 
Gustav  Schilling  of  Stuttgart  (d.  1881)  ; in  1854  the  Vienna  critic  Eduard 
Hanslick  (d.  1904);  from  1858  Adolf  Kullak  of  Berlin  (d.  1862);  from 
1863  Karl  Kostlin  of  Tubingen  (d.  1894);  and  from  1868  Rudolf  Hermann 
Lotze  (d.  1881),  then  of  Leipsic. 

As  illustrations  of  the  growing  attention  to  detailed  analysis  may  be  cited 
numerous  studies  (from  1840)  by  Wagner;  many  (from  1843)  by  Berlioz ; 
pamphlets  (1845-52)  on  Bach’s  cantatas  and  Matthew  Passion  by  Johann 
Theodor  Mosewius  of  Breslau  (d.  1858);  on  Bach’s  Kunst  der  Fuge  by 
Hauptmann;  on  various  Wagner  works  (from  1851)  and  on  Field’s  noc- 
turnes by  Liszt ; various  works  (1852-65)  on  Beethoven’s  three  styles,  etc., 
by  Wilhelm  von  Lenz  (d.  1883);  on  several  Wagner  works  (1853-69)  by 
Franz  Muller  of  Weimar  (d.  1876)  ; on  Handel’s  Israel  in  Egypt  (1854)  by 
Hermann  Kiister  (d.  1878)  ; on  Beethoven’s  sonatas  and  symphonies  ( 1 857—8) 
by  ‘ Ernst  von  Elterlein  ’ [Ernst  Gottschald]  ; on  Schumann’s  Faust  music 
(i860)  by  Peter  Lohmann  of  Leipsic  (d.  1907);  on  Mozart’s  Magic  Flute 
(1862)  by  Nohl  (d.  1885)  ; on  Beethoven’s  piano  works  (1863)  by  Marx  (d. 
1866)  ; on  works  by  Pergolesi,  Gluck,  etc.  (1863-8)  by  Francois  de  Villars 
(d.  1879)  ; on  Beethoven's  dramatic  writing  (1865)  by  Hermann  Deiters  (d. 
1907),  then  of  Bonn  ; etc. 

Among  German  critics,  besides  Schumann  and  various  historians  and 
theorists  already  named,  may  be  added  from  1823  Ludwig  Rellstab  of  Berlin 
(d.  i860)  ; from  1836  Rudolf  Hirsch  of  Vienna  (d.  1872)  ; from  about  1850 
Ferdinand  Hiller  of  Cologne  (d.  1885),  and  Karl  Kossmaly  of  Stettin  (d. 
1893);  and,  chief  of  all,  from  1854  Eduard  Hanslick  (d.  1904),  who  became 
one  of  the  most  influential  champions  of  ‘ absolute  music’  as  against  Wagner, 
Berlioz  and  Liszt,  besides  being  a valuable  historian. 

Naturally,  a period  so  replete  with  artistic  and  literary  production  was 
one  in  which  music-publishing  was  greatly  extended.  Among  the  houses 
established  were  in  1838  that  of  Bote  &r*  Bock  at  Berlin ; about  1840  that 
of  Heugel  at  Paris ; in  1846  that  of  Roder  at  Leipsic;  in  1849  that  of 
Rieter-Biedermann  at  Winterthur;  in  1851  that  of  Litolff  at  Brunswick; 
in  1851  that  of  Kahnt  at  Leipsic ; and  in  1853  that  of  Augener  at  London. 

229.  Summary  of  the  Period.  — The  development  of  Germany 
before  the  middle  of  the  century  was  accompanied  by  an  un- 
precedented dominance  of  German  influences  in  the  musical 
world.  It  was  in  Germany  almost  alone  that  really  constructive 
and  directive  advance  took  place  in  composition,  technique, 
theory  and  scholarship.  The  apparent  exceptions  of  Chopin 
and  Berlioz  are  not  sufficient  to  set  this  statement  aside,  since 
the  work  of  both  was  at  once  absorbed  into  the  general  current 
of  German  thought.  A recapitulation  of  the  movements  of  the 
time,  therefore,  must  chiefly  concern  those  in  progress  in  Germany. 


SUMMARY  OF  THE  PERIOD  63 1 

The  novelty  and  energy  of  effort  made  the  period  one  of 
notable  transitions  and  revolutions,  and  hence  one  of  debate 
and  conflict.  First  came  the  overflow  of  the  romantic  tide, 
strong  in  sentiment  and  phantasy,  impatient  of  set  patterns 
and  rules,  eager  to  test  instrumental  means  of  expression,  yet 
quick  to  seize  upon  the  neglected  capacity  of  the  solo  song, 
and  provocative  of  new  intellectual  attitudes  toward  all  musical 
art.  Against  this  stood  both  the  reactive  conservatism  of  ad- 
herents to  the  old  vocal  polyphony  or  the  stern  and  condensed 
style  of  Bach,  and  the  compromising  party  made  up  of  Men- 
delssohn and  his  many  followers,  who  sought  to  utter  a romantic 
message  in  classical  phraseology.  This  general  antithesis  broke 
up  into  various  smaller  ones,  as  between  romantic  freedom  and 
classical  regularity,  or  between  intensely  subjective  expression 
and  the  pursuit  of  tonal  beauty  of  an  objective  sort,  or  between 
styles  generated  by  the  peculiarities  of  instruments  and  those 
that  were  distinctively  vocal,  or  between  lyric  melody  and  poly- 
phonic solidity.  In  all  these  directions  the  new  and  the  old 
were  contesting  for  supremacy,  too  often  without  seeing  that 
they  were  not  utterly  at  variance. 

While  all  this  was  going  on,  came  the  advent  of  Wagner 
with  his  original,  radical  and  powerful  conception  of  the  opera, 
expressed  at  first  mildly  and  then  with  gigantic  audacity.  Here 
was  a challenge  to  nearly  the  whole  body  of  operatic  conven- 
tions, Italian,  French  and  even  German.  This  throwing  down 
of  the  gauntlet  precipitated  a war  of  words  more  extensive  and 
bitter  than  any  other  in  music-history,  one  which  outlasted  the 
period  before  us  and  which  ran  out  into  all  sorts  of  ramifica- 
tions. In  particular,  the  Wagner  question  seemed  to  be  en- 
tangled with  the  whole  debate  about 4 program  ’ versus  ‘ absolute  * 
music,  both  because  Wagner  was  championed  by  Liszt  and  be- 
cause the  Wagnerian  theory  of  the  opera  had  evident  analogies 
with  the  use  of  4 program  ’ in  instrumental  writing.  But  the 
Wagner  revolution  had  much  more  profound  characteristics. 
Wagner’s  technical  procedures  involved  great  apparent  depar- 
tures from  accepted  standards  and  put  a severe  strain  upon 
tastes  educated  in  simpler  methods.  And  the  grandiose  scale 
and  fervid  profusion  of  his  mature  creations  staggered  con- 
servative comprehension.  Had  not  the  essential  logic  of  most 
of  his  innovations  and  the  genuine  value  of  his  musical  ideas 


632 


THE  MIDDLE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


gradually  become  clear,  his  later  works  would  certainly  not 
have  been  more  than  a passing  marvel.  But  the  solution  of 
the  Wagner  problem  belongs  to  the  later  period  (see  sec.  230). 

The  influence  of  the  great  triumvirate,  Berlioz,  Liszt  and 
Wagner,  stimulated,  if  it  did  not  occasion,  the  advance  of  several 
groups  who  explicitly  aimed  at  setting  up  ‘ new  * styles  of  com- 
position, first  the  ‘ new-German,’  then  the  ‘ new-Russian,’  and 
the  ‘ new-French,'  followed  by  others,  each  desiring  to  express 
its  national  individuality  in  terms  other  than  those  of  past  aca- 
demic formulae.  In  perhaps  all  of  these  there  was  something  of 
a feverish  reaction  against  tradition,  an  over-exaltation  of  tem- 
perament and  mood,  a curious  search  for  impressionistic  effects, 
even  an  untamed  recklessness  and  wildness.  Yet  the  revolt 
from  mere  authority  and  the  craving  for  vitality,  and  even  for 
‘ realism,’  were  inevitable  expressions  of  the  spirit  of  the  age. 
They  helped  to  advance  imperfect  processes  to  completion  and  to 
open  gateways  into  unoccupied  domains  (see  secs.  231-232). 

It  may  be  said,  however,  that  from  this  period  came  the  now 
conspicuous  tendency  to  exalt  forms  and  styles  of  music  that 
appeal  only  to  a limited  class  of  connoisseurs.  At  the  very 
moment  that  music  was  reaching  more  people  than  ever  before, 
at  least  in  its  more  elaborate  expressions,  it  was  also  becoming 
more  specialized  and  even  esoteric.  It  is  true  that  music-history 
has  repeatedly  shown  that  sensitiveness  to  musical  art  is  capa- 
ble of  extraordinarily  rapid  development,  so  that  what  is  abstruse 
to  one  generation  becomes  commonplace  to  the  next.  But,  even 
with  this  qualification,  some  tendencies  bequeathed  by  this  mid- 
dle period  to  the  later  one  have  aroused  a degree  of  question. 

However  this  may  be,  the  period  was  extraordinarily  rich  in 
those  enterprises  of  education  and  literature  that  are  always  the 
connecting  links  between  rudimentary  and  advanced  art,  between 
popular  thought  and  artistic  specialization.  These  mediating  fac- 
tors included  not  only  the  schools  of  music,  the  army  of  detached 
teachers,  the  musical  periodicals,  and  the  books  about  music  in 
its  many  aspects,  but  also  every  organized  project  for  presenting 
the  larger  musical  works  to  the  public,  especially  the  opera  and 
both  vocal  and  instrumental  concerts.  Through  all  these 
avenues  of  education,  as  never  before,  musical  art  was  now  be- 
ginning to  attain  its  place  as  a conspicuous  and  valuable  force  in 
the  personal  and  communal  culture  of  modern  society. 


CONCLUSION 


BRIEF  SKETCH  OF  THE  LATER  NINETEENTH 

CENTURY 


CONCLUSION 

BRIEF  SKETCH  OF  THE  LATER  NINETEENTH 

CENTURY 

230.  The  Wagnerian  Triumph. 

231.  The  National  Groups  (a). 

232.  The  National  Groups  (b). 

233.  Music  in  the  United  States. 

234.  Some  Final  Words. 


634 


CONCLUSION 


BRIEF  SKETCH  OF  THE  LATER  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 

230.  The  Wagnerian  Triumph.  — In  the  last  third  of  the  cen- 
tury the  supreme  single  event  was  the  achievement  of  Wagner’s 
lifelong  ambition.  The  Bayreuth  performances  from  1876 
onward  made  an  epoch  in  musical  art.  They  brought  out 
Wagner’s  later  dramas  in  accordance  with  all  his  ideas  of 
apparatus  and  effect.  They  demonstrated  his  power  to  com- 
mand popular  enthusiasm  and  critical  respect.  They  led  at  once 
to  productions  elsewhere  on  a somewhat  parallel  scale,  at  least 
with  exceptional  attention  to  the  detail  of  representation.  They 
forced  the  operatic  world  to  adjust  its  thought  to  new  ideals  of 
technique  on  every  side.  They  stimulated  a profound  remodel- 
ing of  style  on  the  part  of  dramatic  and  orchestral  composers  in 
all  countries,  tending  more  or  less  toward  an  imitation  of  the 
Wagnerian  procedures,  often  extremely  clever,  but,  as  a rule, 
without  creative  energy  to  be  compared  with  his.  They  thus 
introduced  into  the  musical  world  a ferment  whose  working  is 
still  widely  conspicuous. 

The  first  consequence  of  all  this  was  naturally  a fresh  atten- 
tion to  the  opera  as  a consummate  art-form,  viewed  now  not 
from  the  restricted  and  manneristic  angle  of  the  earlier  Italian 
writers,  but  as  a genuine  drama  in  music.  Of  course,  the  tradi- 
tions of  each  country  and  school  continued  to  make  themselves 
felt,  so  that  new  types  were  never  without  evident  connection 
with  the  past  — as,  for  example,  in  the  case  of  Verdi.  But 
everywhere  the  details  of  treatment  began  to  undergo  extensive 
readjustments  to  fit  them  to  compete  before  the  critics  and  the 
public  with  the  gigantic  Wagnerian  constructions.  The  two 
most  striking  instances  of  this  process  were  the  evolution  of  the 
French  drame  lyrique  out  of  the  opera  comique  under  a series 
of  composers,  and  the  setting  up  of  a new  type  of  Italian  opera 
under  the  lead  of  Verdi.  Equally  important  was  the  unfolding 
of  the  modern  German  opera,  but  in  this  case  no  such  recon- 

635 


636 


THE  LATER  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


struction  was  demanded,  since  the  Wagnerian  movement  was 
itself  characteristically  German,  an  organic  extension  of  drifts 
that  had  been  strong  since  Weber’s  time. 

But  quite  as  significant  was  the  reaction  of  the  Wagnerian 
style  upon  orchestral  music.  With  Wagner  himself  the  orches- 
tra was  a means  to  an  end,  but  his  use  of  it  was  so  extraordinary 
that  it  generated  a new  style.  Here  he  was  in  line  with  several 
other  masters  who,  consciously  or  unconsciously,  had  been 
breaking  away  from  the  strict  notions  of  form  and  disposition 
that  had  been  pushed  into  the  foreground  by  the  founders  of 
modern  orchestral  music.  Wagner  was  attacked  by  Hanslick 
and  others  as  the  enemy  of  ‘absolute  music,’  and  the  effort 
was  made  to  show  that  his  tendency  was  so  to  mingle  musical 
expression  with  other  elements,  especially  those  of  literature, 
that  his  style  was  actually  subversive  of  the  purity  and  indi- 
viduality of  music  as  an  art.  But  the  fact  proved  to  be  that 
in  his  use  of  orchestral  resources  — as,  indeed,  of  vocal  re- 
sources — he  disclosed  important  new  possibilities  of  expression, 
which  could  be  applied  fruitfully  without  being  entangled  in 
dramatic  or  other  literary  alliances.  Whether  or  not  this  was 
deliberately  a part  of  the  program  of  his  ambition,  the  result 
showed  that  his  influence  upon  orchestral  music  was  as  rapid 
and  thoroughgoing  as  upon  the  opera.  Here  again  the  con- 
sequences in  different  countries  varied  greatly  according  to  the 
quality  of  the  national  genius,  but  were  conspicuous  everywhere 
except  in  Italy  (which  has  never  shown  national  power  in  or- 
chestral writing).  Inasmuch  as  the  apparatus  for  orchestral 
performances  of  the  finest  character  is  generally  more  available 
than  that  of  the  opera  in  its  most  advanced  form,  the  practical 
effect  of  this  orchestral  influence  has  been  more  widely  felt  than 
that  of  the  operatic  influence  above  mentioned. 

The  success  of  Wagner  was  a crowning  triumph  for  German 
music.  His  style  and  theories  were  legitimate  results  of  move- 
ments in  artistic  thought  that  had  been  progressing  in  central 
Europe  for  more  than  a century,  and  that  had  made  German 
musicians  in  most  respects  the  lawgivers  and  prophets  of  the 
musical  world.  Wagner’s  own  spirit  was  intensely  and  passion- 
ately German.  His  whole  mental  training  had  been  in  the 
atmosphere  of  German  science,  literature  and  philosophy.  He 
drew  his  artistic  inspiration  mainly  from  the  store  of  myths 


THE  POWER  OF  WAGNERISM 


637 


accumulated  among  Teutonic  peoples  and  expressive  of  their 
racial  consciousness.  And  his  victory  was  coincident  in  time 
with  the  unification  of  the  German  Empire  and  its  advance  into 
a controlling  position  in  European  politics.  Hence  the  Wag- 
nerian style  at  its  climax  illustrated  and  declared  the  German 
genius  for  music  in  an  eminent  degree.  In  consequence,  the 
pursuit  of  advanced  composition  in  German  countries  was  still 
further  stimulated.  At  the  same  time  the  ambition  of  other 
nations  was  powerfully  quickened  to  achieve  something  parallel 
for  themselves.  The  potency  of  Wagner’s  influence  is  attested 
not  only  by  the  direct  imitations  in  its  own  field,  but  by  some  of 
the  efforts  to  match  his  success  through  efforts  in  other  fields 
that  are  only  distantly  analogous. 

Among  those  who  have  been  most  stimulated  by  Wagner  and  Liszt  the 
tendency  has  been  strong  to  magnify  some  sort  of  literary  topic  or  in- 
tellectual train  of  ideas  as  a guide  in  laying  out  musical  processes.  This 
is  a natural  result  of  the  dramatism  of  the  one  master  and  the  ‘ program  ’ 
style  of  the  other,  though  some  recent  works  do  not  belong  exactly  to 
either  category.  A form  of  composition  that  has  been  specially  favored 
is  the  choral  ballade,  usually  more  or  less  frankly  dramatic  — a form 
susceptible  of  indefinite  orchestral  expansion  and  enrichment,  and  utiliz- 
ing the  varied  capacities  of  both  soloists  and  chorus  as  well.  The  endless 
production  of  songs  of  every  description  goes  steadily  on,  each  centring 
about  a specific  text,  with  its  theme,  its  poetic  imagery,  its  chain  of 
sentiments.  But  purely  instrumental  writing,  also,  shows  a striking 
tendency  to  follow  lines  of  thought  somehow  supplied  to  the  hearer  by 
a title,  motto  or  argument.  The  ‘program’  method  in  some  form  is 
conspicuous  in  every  variety  of  composition.  By  some  critics  this  is 
attributed  to  Wagner’s  influence.  By  others  it  is  held  to  be  a general 
modern  tendency,  of  which  Wagner  and  Liszt  were  merely  illustrations. 
However  this  may  be,  it  is  a question  whether  the  essential  limits  of 
musical  art  have  not  been  stretched  in  this  direction  about  as  far  as  is 
wise.  Certainly  nothing  extraneous  can  take  the  place  of  genuine  fresh- 
ness of  tonal  inspiration.  The  lack  of  such  inspiration  among  some 
recent  composers  has  been  evidenced  on  the  one  hand  by  a straining 
after  prodigious  intricacy  of  construction  or  after  startling  melodic  or 
harmonic  extremes,  and,  on  the  other,  by  a misguided  choice  of  morbid 
and  even  degenerate  themes.  Opulence  on  the  side  of  procedure  and 
technique  have  no  enduring  value  unless  directed  and  vitalized  by 
genuine  artistic  initiative  and  invention. 

From  the  many  German  and  Austrian  composers  who  have  worked  in  the 
operatic  field  the  following  may  be  selected  as  illustrating  varied  ten- 
dencies : — 


638 


THE  LATER  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


Bernhard  Scholz  of  Frankfort,  born  in  1835,  with  8 operas  (from  1858), 
the  latest  of  which  are  Ingo  (1898,  Frankfort)  and  Anno  1757  (1903,  Berlin), 
and  much  instrumental  music;  Max  Zenger  of  Munich,  born  in  1837,  with  4 
operas  (from  1863),  notably  Wieland  der  Schmied  (1880,  Munich),  the  strik- 
ing oratorio  Kain  (1867),  many  cantatas,  2 symphonies,  etc. ; Victor  Nessler 
of  Strassburg  (d.  1890),  with  11  operas  and  operettas  (from  1864),  especially 
Der  Rattenf anger  von  Hatneln  (1879)  and  Der  Tro?npeter  von  Sakkingen 
(1884),  and  a number  of  choral  ballades;  Ignaz  Briill  of  Vienna,  born  in 
1846,  an  able  pianist,  with  10  operas  (from  1864),  of  which  Das goldene  Kreuz 
(1875,  Berlin)  and  the  comic  Der  Husar  (1898,  Vienna)  have  had  decided 
success,  besides  many  other  works  ; Joseph  Rheinberger  of  Munich  (d.  1901), 
a prolific  composer  in  all  forms,  especially  those  for  organ,  piano  or  chorus 
that  admit  of  great  contrapuntal  skill,  with  3 operas  (from  1869),  an  oratorio, 
many  cantatas,  extensive  sacred  works,  a variety  of  other  vocal  and  instru- 
mental music,  etc.;  Heinrich  Hofmann  of  Berlin  (d.  1902),  with  7 operas, 
beginning  with  Cartouche  (1869),  important  orchestral  works,  chamber  music, 
an  oratorio  (1896),  many  choral  cantatas,  elegant  piano-pieces,  etc.;  August 
Klughardt  of  Dessau  (d.  1902),  an  admirer  of  Liszt,  with  4 operas  (from 
1 87 1 ),  3 oratorios,  5 symphonies,  several  overtures,  symphonic  poems,  cham- 
ber music  and  many  sohgs  ; Hermann  Goetz  of  Zurich  (d.  1876,  36  years  old), 
with  2 operas,  especially  Die  Zahmung der  Wider spenstigen  (1874,  Mannheim), 
a symphony,  some  cantatas  and  chamber  pieces ; Karl  Grammann  of  Dres- 
den (d.  1897),  with  6 operas  (from  1875),  2 symphonies  and  various  other 
works  in  Wagnerian  style  ; Albert  Thierfelder  of  Rostock,  born  in  1846,  with 
5 operas  (from  1877),  2 symphonies,  several  cantatas  and  chamber  works; 
August  Bungert  of  Berlin,  born  in  1846,  with  a comic  opera  (1884)  and  two 
extended  opera-cycles,  Die  Ilias  (2  works)  and  Die  Odyssee  (4  works),  begun 
in  1871,  a symphonic  poem,  a cantata  and  other  works;  Cyrill  Kistler  of 
Kissingen,  born  in  1848,  with  4 operas  (from  1884);  Richard  Heuberger  of 
Vienna,  born  in  1850,  with  8 operas  and  operettas  (from  1886),  especially 
Mirjam  (1889-94),  many  works  for  orchestra  and  chorus,  etc;  Wilhelm 
Kienzl  of  Gratz,  born  in  1857,  with  4 operas  (from  1886),  especially  Heilmar 
(1892,  Munich)  and  Der  Evangelimann  (1895,  Berlin),  besides  much  original 
criticism;  Felix  von  Woyrsch  of  Altona,  born  in  i860,  with  4 operas  (from 
1886),  among  them  Wikingerfahrt  (1896,  Nuremberg),  several  chorus 
works,  a symphony,  etc.;  Robert  Fuchs  of  Vienna,  born  in  1847,  with  2 
operas  (1889, ’92),  and  striking  orchestral  and  chamber  music ; the  distin- 
guished conductor  and  critic  Felix  Weingartner  of  Munich,  born  in  1863,  with 
3 operas  (from  1884),  including  Genesius  (1892)  and  the  dramatic  trilogy 
Orestes  (1902,  Leipsic),  2 symphonies,  symphonic  poems,  etc.;  Engelbert 
Humperdinck  of  Berlin,  born  in  1854,  famous  for  his  Hansel  und  Gretel 
(1893,  Weimar)  and  4 other  operas;  Max  Schillings  of  Munich,  born  in 
1868,  with  2 operas  (from  1894) ; and  Eugene  d’Albert,  born  in  1864 
(Glasgow),  first  famous  as  a pianist,  with  7 operas  (from  1893),  including 
Gemot  (1897,  Mannheim),  Kain  (1900,  Berlin)  and  Irn  Tiefland  (1903, 
Prague),  2 piano-concertos,  a symphony,  etc. 

Richard  Strauss  of  Berlin,  born  in  1864,  is  at  present  the  most  conspicuous 
figure  in  both  the  orchestral  and  the  operatic  fields.  His  command  of  every 


THE  GERMAN  GROUP 


639 


technical  resource  is  phenomenal,  his  ambition  and  energy  impressive,  and  his 
originality  and  artistic  daring  unquestioned.  His  first  renown  came  from 
symphonic  poems,  like  Don  Juan  (1889),  Tod  und  Verklarung  (1890),  Till 
Eulenspiegels  lustige  Streiche  (1895),  Also  sprach  Zarathustra  (1896)  and  Ein 
Heldettlebeii  (1899).  His  operas  include  Guntram  (1894,  Weimar),  Feuersnot 
(1901,  Dresden)  and  the  much-debated  Salome  (1905,  Dresden).  He  has  also 
written  2 symphonies,  much  chamber  music  and  many  songs. 

To  these  may  be  added  a few  more,  not  so  specially  distinguished  in  opera, 
but  otherwise  important : — 

Joseph  Brambach  of  Bonn  (d.  1902),  the  writer  of  a number  of  fine  choral 
cantatas;  Felix  Draeseke  of  Dresden,  born  in  1835,  who  for  a time  was 
associated  with  Wagner  and  Liszt,  but  later  reverted  to  more  conservative 
styles,  with  many  orchestral  and  vocal  works,  besides  4 operas  (from  1867), 
notably  Herr  at  (1892,  Dresden)  ; Max  Bruch  of  Berlin,  born  in  1838,  an  emi- 
nent composer  in  the  choral  field,  with  also  3 symphonies,  striking  violin- 
concertos  and  other  chamber  music,  etc. ; Heinrich  von  Herzogenberg  of 
Berlin  (d.  1900),  with  similar  works,  besides  piano-pieces  ; Jean  Louis  NicodS 
of  Dresden,  born  in  1853,  a master  of  orchestral  style,  and  a writer  for  the 
piano  and  the  voice;  Anton  Riickauf  (d.  1903),  an  eminent  song-composer; 
and  Hugo  Wolf  of  Vienna  (d.  1903),  still  more  famous  for  his  songs. 

231.  The  National  Groups  (a).  — Nationalism  in  musical  art 
is  no  new  thing.  Every  race,  every  distinct  country,  and  often 
limited  districts  within  a single  country,  have  always  had  idioms 
of  expression,  peculiarities  of  temperament,  tendencies  of  feel- 
ing and  a range  of  ideas  which  the  keen  observer  and  critic 
learns  to  know  as  individual  and  distinctive.  Every  composer 
and  player  usually  betrays  in  all  that  he  does  what  was  his 
origin  and  education  in  a particular  people  and  land.  Even  in 
the  earlier  periods,  when  music  was  held  to  be  far  more  homo- 
geneous than  now  in  contrapuntal,  dramatic  or  instrumental 
method,  these  national  traits  made  themselves  felt.  The  whole 
course  of  music-history  illustrates  the  principle  that,  as  evolution 
proceeds,  musical  art  tends  to  become  heterogeneous  along 
lines  of  race,  country  and  local  predilection. 

But  in  these  latter  days  this  age-long  tendency  has  received 
impetus  from  several  directions.  One  cause  is  political  — the 
steady  rise  of  ambition  for  national  freedom  and  autonomy, 
with  the  social  and  intellectual  life  appropriate  to  each  racial 
division.  Another  cause  is  the  discovery  by  scientific  criticism 
of  the  suggestiveness,  for  a full  knowledge  of  humanity  and 
society,  of  traits  induced  by  descent  and  habitat,  what  had  been 
merely  odd  or  picturesque  becoming  significant.  Still  another 


640  THE  LATER  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 

is  the  advance  in  musical  theory,  resulting  in  a more  searching 
classification  of  details  of  procedure  and  a juster  appreciation  of 
the  technical  value  of  neglected  points.  Thus,  just  at  the  time 
when  the  general  qualities  of  races  and  regions  have  been 
eager  to  find  for  themselves  ampler  expression,  the  study  of 
peculiar  rhythms,  melodic  and  harmonic  formulae,  specific 
dance-  or  song-types,  predilections  as  to  choral  or  instru- 
mental styles,  and  the  like,  has  become  somewhat  common  and 
enterprising.  The  phrase  ‘ national  music,’  which  was  once  used 
mainly  to  describe  types  of  unconscious  folk-music,  has  now 
been  extended  to  apply  to  a number  of  extremely  complicated 
artistic  efforts  that  seek  to  create  for  each  principal  country  a 
somewhat  complete  musical  style  and  literature  of  its  own.  In 
the  nature  of  things,  since  music  is  a universal  art,  with  a large 
body  of  technical  processes  that  are  common  to  all  styles,  and 
with  a literature  that  is  in  cosmopolitan  circulation,  the  amount 
of  local  variation  that  is  possible  is  not  extensive ; but  the  local 
types  are  nevertheless  full  of  interest. 

Here  is  an  appropriate  place  to  refer  to  the  formation  at  Leipsic  in 
1899  of  the  Internationale  Musik-Gesellschaft,  intended  to  bind  together 
musical  scholars  in  all  lands.  This  association  has  drawn  into  its  ranks 
a large  number  of  musicians,  and  has  active  national  branches  or  ‘ sec- 
tions ’ in  nearly  twenty  countries.  It  publishes  a monthly  Zeitschrift  and 
quarterly  Sammelb'ande , representing  the  highest  quality  of  scholarship  as 
applied  to  music. 

In  this  connection  it  should  also  be  said  that  historical  data  of  the  first 
importance  are  constantly  being  supplied  by  several  great  serial  publica- 
tions, like  the  Denkmaler  der  Tonkunst  in  Oesterreich  (from  1894),  the 
Denkmaler  deutscher  Tonkunst  (from  1892),  and  several  other  similar 
undertakings,  each  aiming  to  gather  the  most  significant  works  of  olden 
time  in  particular  countries  and  to  annotate  them  so  that  they  may  be 
fruitful  objects  of  study. 

The  French  is  one  of  the  most  individual  of  recent  groups, 
though  in  the  details  of  expression  not  specially  marked  by  the 
use  of  purely  racial  or  local  peculiarities.  Its  character  inheres 
rather  in  certain  large  qualities  of  style  — in  general  elegance 
and  brilliance  of  effect,  in  extremely  dexterous  harmony  and 
counterpoint,  in  ingenious  and  captivating  disposition  of  both 
instrumental  and  vocal  materials,  and  in  great  definiteness  and 
clarity  of  conception,  usually  combined  with  poetic  delicacy  and 
genuine  imagination.  French  musicians  have  been  rigorous 


THE  FRENCH  GROUP 


641 


and  profound  students  of  composition  as  an  art,  and  are  notable 
for  utilizing  the  results  of  progress  everywhere  without  losing 
originality  and  freedom.  In  all  the  larger  branches  of  composi- 
tion they  have  fully  held  their  own  with  others,  and  in  organ  music 
have  become  leaders.  Their  contributions  to  the  science  of  musi- 
cal structure  are  probably  the  most  important  of  recent  years. 

Prominent  representatives  of  the  large  French  group  are  these : — 

Camille  Saint-Saens,  born  in  1835,  is  n°t  only  the  oldest,  but  one  of  the 
most  versatile  and  powerful,  having  been  fruitful  in  every  style,  with  5 sym- 
phonies, 4 symphonic  poems,  5 piano-concertos,  much  chamber  music,  about 
10  operas  (from  1872),  including  Samson  et  Dalila  (1877,  Weimar),  Henri 
VIII  (1883)  and  the  Biblical  drama,  Le  Deluge , several  cantatas,  masses  and 
much  church  music ; F61ix  Alexandre  Guilmant,  born  in  1837,  a great  organ- 
ist, with  7 organ-sonatas,  many  other  organ-pieces,  3 masses,  motets  and 
other  choir  music;  Theodore  Dubois,  born  in  1837,  also  a fine  organist,  with 
3 oratorios,  as  Les  sept  paroles  du  Christ  (1867),  many  cantatas  and  choral 
works,  5 operas  (from  1873),  and  a variety  of  orchestral  pieces,  etc. ; Georges 
Bizet  (d.  1875),  whose  brilliant  promise,  especially  revealed  in  Carmen  (1875), 
besides  earlier  operas  (from  1857)  and  in  many  piano  works,  was  cut  short 
when  he  was  not  37  years  old  ; Victorin  de  Joncieres  (d.  1903),  with  6 operas 
(from  1867),  including  Dimitri  (1876)  and  Le  chevalier  Jea7i  (1885),  music 
for  ‘ Hamlet1  (1862)  and  considerable  orchestral  and  chamber  music;  Jules 
Massenet,  born  in  1842,  an  exuberantly  prolific  writer,  with  about  20  dramas 
(from  1867),  such  as  Le  Roi  de  Lahore  (1877),  Herodiade  (1884),  Manon 
(1884)  and  Werther  (1892),  brilliant  orchestral  suites  and  fantasias,  etc.; 
Alexis  Emanuel  Chabrier  (d.  1894),  with  5 operas  (from  1877),  mostly 
comedies;  Emile  Paladilhe,  born  in  1844,  with  6 operas  (from  1872),  a 
symphony,  2 masses,  etc.;  Charles  Widor,  born  in  1845,  a aoted  organist, 
with  10  organ-symphonies,  6 dramatic  works  (from  1880),  choral  and  chamber 
works,  etc.;  Gaston  Sal vayre,  born  in  1847,  with  5 operas  (from  1877),  a 
symphony  and  choral  works ; Benjamin  Godard  (d.  1895),  an  expert  violin- 
ist, with  several  symphonies  and  chamber  works  of  distinction,  and  8 operas 
(from  1878),  including  La  vivandiere  (1895)  ; Vincent  d'lndy,  born  in  1851, 
a master  of  orchestral  style,  with  many  symphonies,  overtures  and  other 
pieces,  a few  operas  (from  1882),  especially  Fervaal  (1895-7),  etc. ; Alfred 
Bruneau,  born  in  1857,  with  5 operas  (from  1887),  including  L'attaque  du 
moulin  (1893),  overtures  and  symphonic  poems,  songs,  etc. ; Gustave  Char- 
pentier,  born  in  i860,  with  the  concert-drama  La  vie  du  poete  (1892),  several 
operas,  including  Le  couronnement  de  la  Muse  or  Louise  (1898,  Lille),  and 
impressionistic  orchestral  works  ; and,  most  poetic  and  original  of  the  present 
school,  Claude  Debussy,  born  in  1862,  with  striking  cantatas  and  symphonic 
poems,  and  a few  operas,  including  Pelleas  et  Melisande  (1902),  besides 
smaller  works. 

To  these  may  be  added  the  Belgian  Edgar  Tinel  of  Brussels,  born  in  1854, 
composer  of  the  oratorio  Franciscus  (1888),  striking  church  music,  some 
cantatas,  etc. 


642 


THE  LATER  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


The  recent  Italian  group  has  shown  great  zeal  in  pushing 
itself  forward.  The  old  disdain  of  foreign  styles  has  given  way 
to  a general  effort  to  imitate  the  Wagnerian  technique  in  or- 
chestration and  to  achieve  intense  dramatic  success.  The  warm 
abundance  of  melody  is  usually  conspicuous,  but  few  writers 
evince  ability  for  sustained  or  intricate  construction.  Instead, 
there  has  been  a notable  prominence  of  short,  rapidly-moving 
works,  often  explicitly  ‘ veristic  ’ in  plot  and  treatment.  The 
opera  is  still  the  goal  of  musical  ambition  for  most  musicians, 
but  attention  to  orchestral  and  chamber  music  is  becoming 
steadily  greater  and  more  fruitful. 

The  number  of  Italian  composers  who  have  won  international  recognition 
for  many  works  is  small ; among  those  who  are  most  prominent  are  the 
following : — 

Arrigo  Boito  of  Milan,  born  in  1842,  with  4 operas,  the  best  of  which  is 
Mefistofele  (1868-75),  some  cantatas  and  many  fine  librettos;  the  pianist 
Giovanni  Sgambati,  born  in  1843,  with  3 symphonies,  a piano-concerto, 
chamber  music  and  piano-pieces;  Antonio  Smareglia,  born  in  1854,  with 
8 operas  (from  1879),  including  II  vassallo  di  Szigeth  (1889),  a symphonic 
poem  and  songs;  Giuseppe  Martucci  of  Bologna,  born  in  1856,  a careful 
student  of  German  methods,  with  a symphony,  a piano-concerto  and  chamber 
music;  Giacomo  Puccini  of  Milan,  born  in  1858,  with  6 strong  operas  (from 
1884),  including  La  Bohhne  (1896,  Turin),  Tosca  (1900,  Rome)  and  Madama 
Butterfly  (1904,  Milan),  a mass  and  chamber  works;  Ruggiero  Leoncavallo, 
born  in  1858,  a good  pianist,  with  8 operas  (from  1889),  especially  Pagliacci 
(1892,  Milan),  Tommaso  Chatterton  (1896,  Rome)  and  Der  Roland  von  Ber- 
lin (1904,  Berlin)  ; Pietro  Floridia  of  Milan,  born  in  i860,  also  a pianist,  with 
3 operas  (from  1882),  such  as  Maruzza  (1894,  Venice),  a symphony  and 
other  orchestral  and  piano  works ; Alberto  Franchetti,  born  in  1 860,  with  5 
operas,  beginning  with  Asraele  (1888,  Brescia),  a symphony  and  chamber 
pieces;  Spiro  Samara,  born  in  1861,  with  6 operas,  the  first  of  which  was 
Flora  7nirabilis  (1886,  Milan)  ; the  conspicuous  organist  Enrico  Bossi  of 
Bologna,  born  in  1861,  with  strong  chamber  works,  cantatas,  church  music 
and  symphonic  poems,  besides  3 operas;  Pietro  Mascagni,  born  in  1863, 
whose  phenomenally  successful  Cavalleria  rusticana  (1890,  Rome)  has  been 
followed  by  several  more;  Crescenzo  Buongiorno  (d.  1903),  with  about  15 
operas  and  operettas  (from  1887),  the  last  three  in  Germany;  Umberto 
Giordano,  born  in  1867,  with  5 operas  (from  1892),  including  Andrea  Chenier 
(1896,  Milan)  ; and,  standing  apart  from  all  these,  Lorenzo  Perosi,  born  in 
1872,  who  has  made  a name  by  writing  many  masses  and  several  oratorios  of 
some  power  (from  1897). 

The  recent  English  group  has  contained  several  strikingly 
able  writers,  whose  work  has  pushed  out  into  every  field  of 
composition.  Their  activity  has  been  the  more  notable  because 


THE  ENGLISH  GROUP 


643 


since  the  days  of  Purcell  at  the  end  of  the  17th  century  the 
display  of  general  creative  power  has  been  rare  among  English 
musicians,  in  spite  of  a constant  interest  in  things  musical  in 
several  English  circles.  But  the  recent  group  of  composers 
has  thus  far  shown  no  special  homogeneity  of  style  — certainly 
nothing  to  compare  with  the  national  quality  in  German,  French 
or  Italian  writing.  It  is  simply  the  fruit  of  diffused  cosmopol- 
itan influences,  undominated  by  a distinct  nationalism.  Plence 
one  can  hardly  speak  of  an  ‘ English  school  ’ in  an  exact  sense. 
Yet  particular  composers  have  great  individuality,  and,  in 
several  cases,  unquestionable  genius. 

The  acknowledged  leaders  of  the  group  include  the  following  : — 

Arthur  Sullivan  (d.  1900),  popularly  best  known  for  a series  of  almost  20 
sparkling  operettas  (from  1867),  but  also  with  the  opera  Ivanhoe  (1891),  6 
oratorios,  such  as  The  Light  of  the  World  (1873)  and  The  Golden  Legend 
(1886),  incidental  music  to  many  plays,  overtures,  a symphony,  songs,  etc.; 
Alexander  Campbell  Mackenzie,  a Scotsman,  born  in  1847,  with  4 operas 
(from  1883),  2 oratorios,  including  The  Rose  of  Sharon  (1884),  many  fine 
cantatas,  sacred  and  secular,  especially  Veni,  Creator  Spiritus  (1891),  several 
overtures,  violin  music,  etc.;  Charles  Hubert  Hastings  Parry,  born  in  1848, 
with  a portentous  list  of  works  of  every  description,  including  4 symphonies,  3 
oratorios,  beginning  with  Judith  (1888),  a variety  of  other  choral  music, 
chamber  and  piano-pieces,  church  music,  etc. ; Frederic  Hymen  Cowen,  born 
in  1852  in  the  West  Indies,  also  a prolific  writer,  with  4 operas  (from  1876),  4 
oratorios,  many  graceful  cantatas,  6 symphonies,  4 orchestral  suites,  chamber 
music  and  songs;  Charles  Villiers  Stanford,  born  in  1852,  with  4 operas 
(from  1881),  especially  Shamus  O'Brien  (1896),  2 oratorios,  fine  choral  can- 
tatas, 5 symphonies,  chamber  music,  etc. ; and  Edward  Elgar,  born  in  1857, 
with  3 oratorios,  especially  The  Dream  of  Gerontius  (1900)  and  The  Apostles 
(1903),  choral  pieces,  overtures,  songs,  etc.  To  these  may  well  be  added 
Arthur  Goring  Thomas  (d.  1892),  with  3 operas  (from  1883),  cantatas  and 
choral  music;  Edward  German,  born  in  1862,  with  2 symphonies,  incidental 
music  to  plays,  several  symphonic  poems,  chamber  music,  3 operas  and 
songs;  the  Scotsman  Hamish  MacCunn,  born  in  1868,  with  2 operas,  many 
original  cantatas,  as  The  Lay  of  the  Last  Minstrel  (1888),  and  overtures; 
and  the  part-negro  Samuel  Coleridge-Taylor,  born  in  1875,  with  striking 
orchestral  and  choral  works,  especially  Scenes  from  Hiawatha. 

232.  The  National  Groups  (b). — As  compared  with  the  Ger- 
man, French,  Italian  and  English  groups,  those  which  follow  as 
a rule  present  much  that  is  technically  more  fresh  and  in- 
dividual. The  reason  is  simply  that  the  historic  evolution  of 
music  has  been  so  far  dominated  by  the  four  peoples  named 
above  that  the  standard  features  of  style  are  those  most 


644 


THE  LATER  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


natural  to  them.  But  during  the  last  century,  and  especially 
since  about  1850,  representatives  of  other  nations  and  races 
have  become  increasingly  prominent  in  composition,  introduc- 
ing turns  of  expression,  peculiarities  of  temperament,  and  cur- 
rents of  thought  and  feeling  that  are  different.  This  infusion 
of  new  forms  and  materials  into  current  style  has  been  full  of 
picturesque  interest  and  often  of  essential  importance. 

None  of  these  modern  groups  is  really  homogeneous,  all  of  them  con- 
sisting of  more  or  less  distinct  subgroups  or  sections,  each  with  its  native 
traditions  and  modes  of  expression ; but  in  a brief  summary  they  may 
be  treated  roughly  as  units. 

The  Scandinavian  group  (Denmark,  Sweden  and  Norway)  is 
the  oldest  of  these  modern  groups  in  point  of  organized  artistic 
life.  It  attained  its  first  development  early  in  the  19th  century 
under  masters  who  were  in  close  touch  with  German  music,  and 
was  for  a time  only  an  offshoot  of  the  latter.  But  from  about 
i860,  especially  under  the  lead  of  Grieg,  it  has  been  diligently 
cultivating  its  own  peculiar  field  with  enthusiasm.  Scandina- 
vian writing  has  usually  shown  a tendency  to  utilize  the  minor 
tonality,  the  abrupt  and  whimsical  rhythms,  and  the  somewhat 
pathetic,  or  at  least  dreamy,  emotion  of  the  national  folk-songs 
and  dances.  Through  it  all  runs  a strain  of  seriousness  which 
may  be  a reflection  of  the  colder  and  darker  climate  of  the 
North,  but  also  the  refreshing  vigor  and  sturdiness  that  belong 
to  a region  where  mountains  and  sea  are  the  salient  physical 
features.  Conjoined  with  these  pervading  racial  qualities  has 
been  the  eminent  poetic  delicacy  and  insight  of  several  individ- 
ual composers,  who  have  found  means  of  touching  the  heart 
of  the  whole  musical  world  by  a striking  intimacy  and  depth  of 
imagination,  displayed  especially  in  the  smaller  forms  of  com- 
position. 

In  Denmark  are  to  be  noted  Emil  Hartmann  [Jr.]  (d.  1898),  son  of  a dis- 
tinguished father  (see  secs.  205,  213),  with  5 operas’  (from  1867),  3 sympho- 
nies, string-concertos  and  other  chamber  works,  and  national  songs  and 
dances;  August  Winding  (d.  1899),  a fine  pianist,  with  much  piano  music, 
including  a concerto,  2 symphonies,  etc.;  Asger  Hamerik,  born  in  1843, 
since  1871  head  of  the  Peabody  Conservatory  in  Baltimore,  with  4 operas, 
as  Hjalmar  und  Ingeborg  (1868),  5 symphonies,  5 Nordische  Sniten , many 
other  orchestral  and  choral  works  of  large  dimensions,  etc.;  Otto  Mailing, 
born  in  1848,  with  a symphony,  an  overture,  national  choruses  with  orchestra, 


THE  SCANDINAVIAN  GROUP 


645 


songs  and  piano-pieces;  Ludvig  Schytte  of  Vienna,  born  in  1850,  a piano- 
virtuoso,  with  much  characteristic  piano  music  and  2 short  operas ; Victor 
Bendix,  born  in  1851,  with  3 symphonies,  an  overture,  a piano-concerto 
and  many  piano-pieces;  and  August  Enna,  born  in  i860,  a self-taught 
genius,  with  at  least  13  operas,  especially  Die  Hexe  (1892)  and  Aucassin 
utid  Nicolette  (1896),  besides  a violin-concerto,  songs,  etc. 

In  Sweden  may  be  named  August  Johan  Soderman  (d.  1876),  with  an 
operetta,  incidental  music  to  Schiller’s  ‘Jungfrau  von  Orleans,’ a fine  mass, 
choral  works  and  part-songs;  Anders  Hallen,  born  in  1846,  with  4 operas 
(from  1881),  especially  Hexfallen  (1896),  2 Swedish  Rhapsodies,  2 symphonic 
poems,  striking  choral  ballades  and  songs  ; and  Emil  Sjogren,  born  in  1853, 
with  2 violin-sonatas,  piano  works  and  songs. 

In  Norway  the  great  name  is  that  of  Edvard  Hagerup  Grieg  (d.  1907), 
the  most  prominent  master  of  the  northern  group,  with  3 notable  violin- 
sonatas,  3 orchestral  suites,  an  overture,  piano-  and  violin-concertos,  other 
chamber  works,  dramatic  ballades,  many  piano-pieces  and  songs  ; with  Johan 
Svendsen,  born  in  1840,  with  2 symphonies  and  other  orchestral  works,  much 
chamber  music,  orchestral  arrangements  of  piano  works,  many  songs,  etc. ; 
Johan  Selmer,  born  in  1844,  a writer  for  orchestra,  chorus  and  the  solo  voice  in 
an  extreme  modern  style;  Ole  Olsen,  born  in  1850,  of  similar  tendencies, 
with  an  opera,  an  oratorio  (1897),  a symphony,  2 symphonic  poems,  piano- 
pieces,  etc;  and  Christian  Sinding,  born  in  1856,  with  a symphony,  2 violin- 
sonatas,  important  chamber  works,  many  pieces  for  the  piano,  songs,  etc. 

The  three  musical  centres  are  Copenhagen,  Stockholm  and  Christiania. 

The  Czech  and  Magyar  group  (Bohemia  and  Hungary) 
presents  striking  differences  from  all  the  foregoing  in  the 
quality  and  special  forms  of  its  melodic,  rhythmic  and  dynamic 
dialect  of  expression.  In  these  regards  the  national  music  of 
the  Austrian  Empire  supplies  one  of  the  best  illustrations  of 
a type  that  has  relatively  little  connection  with  established 
musical  language,  except  so  far  as  traces  of  its  influence  entered 
musical  literature  through  the  Viennese  writers  of  the  classical 
and  post-classical  periods.  But,  in  addition,  it  is  worth  noting 
that  on  the  whole  Bohemian  and  Hungarian  music  shows  a 
fondness  for  noisy  and  hilarious  forms  whose  origin  is  in  ardent 
social  merrymaking,  or  for  somewhat  grandiose  and  sumptuous 
effects,  such  as  imply  a half-barbaric  notion  of  splendor.  In 
these  respects  this  eastern  music  stands  in  contrast  with  the 
much  more  personal  and  subjective  musical  poesy  to  which 
northern  composers  have  tended.  While  the  latter  have  shown 
a marked  readiness  to  adopt  the  introspective  and  romantic 
attitude  which  Schumann  so  finely  illustrated,  the  music  of 
Austria  tends  rather  to  the  ostentation  or  the  luxurious  sensuous- 


64  6 


THE  LATER  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


ness  exemplified  by  Liszt.  Specially  successful  are  its  effects 
of  vigorous,  dashing  rhythm  and  accent,  and  of  brilliant  color 
in  instrumentation. 

In  the  Bohemian  list  are  Josef  Rozkosny  of  Prague,  born  in  1833,  with  10 
operas  (from  1870),  overtures,  masses  and  other  vocal  music;  Eduard 
Naprawnik  of  St.  Petersburg,  born  in  1839,  a ^ne  pianist  and  conductor,  with 
5 operas,  including  Dubroivski  (1895),  4 symphonies,  symphonic  poems, 
overtures,  chamber  music,  choral  and  solo  works  with  orchestra,  songs,  etc. ; 
Josef  Neswere  of  Olmiitz,  born  in  1842,  specially  noted  for  his  church 
music,  but  also  with  3 operas,  a symphony,  a violin-concerto,  piano-pieces, 
etc. ; Antonin  Dvorak  (d.  1904),  the  best-known  and  most  talented  of  the 
group,  with  9 operas  (from  1874),  such  as  Selni  asedldk  (1877),  the  oratorio 
St.  Ludmila  (1886,  Leeds),  many  choral  works,  largely  sacred,  especially  a 
Stabat  Mater  (1883,  London),  5 symphonies,  the  last  being  From  the  New 
World  (1894,  New  York),  several  orchestral  ballades  and  overtures,  8 string- 
quartets  and  much  other  chamber  music,  a variety  of  piano  music,  songs,  etc. ; 
and  Zdenko  Fibich  of  Prague  (d.  1900),  with  7 operas  (from  1874),  including 
Sarka  (1898),  the  trilogy  Hippodamia  (1890-1),  many  symphonic  poems 
and  overtures,  2 choral  ballades,  3 symphonies,  an  orchestral  suite,  cham- 
ber music  and  many  piano-pieces. 

Among  Hungarians  are  to  be  named  Edmund  von  Mihalowich,  born  in  1842, 
with  4 operas  (from  1882),  of  which  Wieland  der  Schmied  was  on  a text  by 
Wagner,  a symphony,  several  orchestral  ballades,  etc. ; G6za  Zichy,  born  in 
1849,  a remarkable  one-hand  piano-player,  with  2 operas,  especially  Meister 
Roland  (1899),  a cantata  and  choral  works,  piano-studies  for  the  left  hand, 
etc.,  besides  original  poems  ; and  the  important  violinist  Jeno  Hubay,  born  in 
1858,  with  4 operas,  especially  Der  Geigenmacher  von  Cremona  (1893),  a 
symphony,  a violin-concerto  and  other  works  for  the  violin. 

The  Russian  group  (Russia  and  Poland)  has  been  for  several 
decades  full  of  energy  and  productiveness.  Its  ambition  after 
world-wide  recognition  has  not  only  stimulated  study  and  com- 
position at  home,  but  led  to  organized  efforts  to  propagate  itself 
abroad.  The  energy  and  versatility  displayed  are  impressive, 
supported  in  the  case  of  Tschaikowski  and  a few  others  by 
unmistakable  powers  of  creation.  In  all  characteristically 
Russian  music  there  is  a strong  racial  flavor,  derived  from  the 
extremely  varied  and  fertile  folk-music  of  the  several  divisions 
of  the  empire.  This  folk-music  is  one  of  the  most  interesting 
types  found  in  Europe,  having  instinctive  melodic  beauty, 
latent  harmonic  richness  and  restless  rhythmic  individuality. 
In  it  are  usually  to  be  discerned  two  rather  contradictory  strains 
of  feeling  — the  one  sombre  and  even  melancholic,  the  other 


THE  RUSSIAN  GROUP 


647 


gay,  reckless  and  wild  — which  have  undoubted  relations  to  the 
Slavic  temperament  and  the  social  condition  of  the  country  as 
a whole.  This  emotional  paradox  supplies  materials  of  extreme 
artistic  value.  In  point  of  technical  style,  Russian  art,  except 
in  certain  cases,  seems  not  yet  to  have  attained  maturity,  lack- 
ing aesthetic  balance  and  finish.  But  its  vigor  and  enterprise 
have  made  striking  contributions  to  recent  musical  literature. 

Polish  music,  though  akin  to  the  Russian,  has  had  a separate 
history,  having  been  profoundly  influenced  by  both  German  and 
French  styles.  The  national  misfortunes  are  reflected  in  tones 
of  deep  sadness,  as  is  the  national  character  in  passages  of 
proud  dignity  and  refinement.  But  the  Polish  circle  is  com- 
paratively small. 

Prominent  Russian  names  are  Alexander  Borodin  (d.  1887),  with  3 sym- 
phonies, the  symphonic  poem  Dans  les  steppes , string-quartets,  piano-pieces, 
and  the  opera  Prince  Igor  (1891,  finished  by  Rimski-Korsakow)  ; Cesar 
Cui,  born  in  1835,  with  8 operas  (from  1859),  as  William  Ratcliff  (1868) 
and  Angelo  (1876),  4 orchestral  suites,  chamber  and  choral  works,  many  piano- 
pieces  and  songs;  Modest  Mussorgski  (d.  1881),  with  3 operas,  beginning 
with  Boris  Godunow  (1874),  several  choral  works,  piano-pieces  and  striking 
songs;  Peter  Tschaikowski  (d.  1893),  one  of  the  most  gifted  orchestral 
writers  of  recent  times,  with  6 symphonies,  7 symphonic  poems,  4 orchestral 
suites,  several  overtures,  much  chamber  music,  11  operas  (from  1869),  espe- 
cially Eugen  Onegin  (1879)  and  Pique-Dame  (1890),  3 ballets,  numerous  piano- 
pieces  and  songs;  Alexander  Faminzin  (d.  1896),  with  2 operas,  chamber 
pieces,  songs,  and  important  critical  and  historical  writings ; Nicolai  Rimski- 
Korsakow',  born  in  1844,  with  about  a dozen  operas  (from  1873),  especially 
S?iegorotchka  (1882),  Sadko  (1897)  and  Der  unsterbliche  Koschtschrei  (1902), 
3 symphonies,  many  other  orchestral  works,  choral  cantatas  and  many  songs  ; 
Nicolai  Solowiew,  born  in  1846,  with  3 operas,  including  Cordelia  (1885),  with 
interesting  piano-pieces  and  some  orchestral  works  ; Anton  Arenski,  born  in 
1861,  with  3 operas  (from  1892),  2 symphonies,  4 orchestral  suites,  chamber 
works,  original  piano-pieces,  church  music;  Alexander  Glasunow,  born  in 
1865,  an  exceedingly  fertile  orchestral  writer,  with  7 symphonies,  4 suites,  4 
overtures,  2 serenades,  several  symphonic  poems,  5 string-quartets  and  other 
chamber  music,  some  piano  and  choral  works,  and  2 ballets ; Alexander 
Scriabine,  born  in  1872,  a noted  pianist,  with  many  works  for  piano,  besides  2 
symphonies,  a piano-concerto,  etc. ; and  Sergei  Rachmaninow,  born  in 
1873,  with  the  opera  Aleko  (1893),  a symphony,  piano  works  and  songs. 

To  the  Polish  group  belong  Ladislaus  Zelenski  of  Cracow,  born  in  1837, 
with  3 operas  (from  1885),  chamber  works,  church  music,  pieces  for  piano  and 
for  organ,  etc. ; Sigismund  Noszkowski  of  Warsaw,  born  in  1846,  with  2 
symphonies,  cantatas  and  ballades,  the  opera  Livia  (1898),  piano-pieces  and 
songs;  Philipp  Scharwenka  of  Berlin,  born  in  1847,  with  choral  works,  2 


648 


THE  LATER  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


symphonies,  piano  music  and  songs  ; his  brother  Xaver  Scharwenka,  also  of 
Berlin,  born  in  1850,  a fine  pianist,  with  3 important  piano -concertos  and  many 
other  piano  works,  church  music  and  many  songs ; Moritz  Moszkowski  of 
Berlin,  born  in  1854,  another  able  pianist,  with  numerous  popular  orchestral 
and  piano  works,  songs,  the  opera  Boabdil  (1892),  a violin-concerto,  etc; 
and  Ignace  Jan  Paderewski,  born  in  1859,  still  more  famous  as  a vir- 
tuoso on  the  piano,  with  works  for  his  instrument,  the  opera  Manru  (1901),  etc. 

Here  may  be  added  the  name  of  Jean  Sibelius  of  Helsingfors,  born  in  1865, 
a pioneer  in  developing  Finnish  music,  with  2 symphonies,  several  symphonic 
poems,  choral  cantatas,  part-songs  and  many  songs. 

233.  Music  in  the  United  States. — The  development  of  ad- 
vanced musical  interest  in  America  seems  anomalous  when 
compared  with  contemporaneous  European  experience,  though, 
if  one  were  to  go  back  far  enough,  some  analogies  might  be 
found.  In  rapidity  and  variety,  however,  it  is  phenomenal.  In 
the  brief  space  of  a half-century  a strong  new  aspirant  has  come 
into  the  circle  of  musical  countries,  claiming  its  share  in  the 
finest  attainments  and  achievements  of  the  world,  and  increas- 
ingly ambitious  to  be  known  as  a producer  as  well  as  a recip- 
ient. The  American  situation  is  far  too  complex  to  lend 
itself  to  brief  statement,  but  it  has  several  points  of  interest. 

As  has  been  noted  (see  sec.  224),  a change  began  to  be  seen  about 
1850.  Before  that  time  operatic  singers  and  instrumental  virtuosi  had 
found  welcome,  but  music  of  importance  was  exotic  and  sporadic.  The 
influx  of  well-trained  foreign  musicians,  the  influence  of  native-born 
students  who  went  abroad  for  culture,  and  the  general  rise  of  interest  in 
literature  and  art  — all  these  prepared  the  way  for  a healthy  expansion. 
Soon  after  the  Civil  War  came  the  epochal  activity  of  the  great  conductor 
Theodore  Thomas  (d.  1905),  whose  extensive  tours  spread  a knowledge  of 
orchestral  music.  He  was  speedily  followed  by  many  other  cultivated  and 
progressive  leaders  and  organizers.  Hence,  as  regards  the  public  per- 
formance of  important  musical  works  of  all  kinds,  both  the  appliances 
and  the  popular  interest  to  sustain  them  have  advanced  with  signal 
rapidity.  Now,  New  York,  at  least,  is  one  of  the  most  brilliant  operatic 
centres  in  the  world.  A considerable  number  of  more  or  less  permanent 
orchestras  are  statedly  at  work,  of  which  the  New  York  Philharmonic  is 
the  oldest  (see  sec.  224)  and  the  Boston  Symphony  (sustained  by  the 
liberality  of  a wealthy  connoisseur)  the  most  famous.  Chamber  music  is 
receiving  careful  attention  from  several  noted  quartets  in  the  East  and  the 
Middle  West.  Choral  societies  of  size  and  proficiency  are  not  infrequent, 
the  oldest  of  importance  being  the  Ha?idel  and  Haydn  Society  of  Boston 
(founded  1815).  In  all  the  larger  cities  expert  instrumental  and  vocal 
performers  are  numerous.  In  a number  of  cases  American  sopranos  have 
won  distinction  throughout  the  world.  Most  of  the  principal  cities  are 


MUSIC  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES 


649 


supplied  with  a notable  array  of  dignified  concerts,  often  arranged  in 
annual  series.  In  general,  the  amount  of  this  public  musical  life  is  greatest 
in  the  East,  the  two  chief  foci  being  New  York  and  Boston,  but  the  area 
of  activity  has  rapidly  extended  westward,  radiating  especially  from 
Chicago  and  Cincinnati,  and  is  now  reaching  the  South  and  the  Far 
West  as  well. 

Coincident  with  this  energetic  concertistic  life  are  other  efforts.  Some 
kind  of  church  music  is  a practical  necessity  everywhere,  though  the 
absence  of  any  dominant  type  of  service  precludes  uniformity.  For  a 
long  period,  except  in  Catholic  and  Episcopal  churches,  small  choirs 
(usually  quartets)  have  been  common,  bringing  into  prominence  a type 
of  sacred  music  somewhat  diverse  from  any  form  elsewhere.  The  use  of 
choral  music,  however,  is  steadily  increasing.  Private  teachers,  especially 
of  piano-playing  and  singing,  are  scattered  everywhere,  constituting  a 
profession  more  and  more  held  in  honor.  Yet,  since  no  system  of  examin- 
ation and  certification  is  possible,  many  pass  for  musicians  without  much 
breadth  of  training.  Musical  clubs  of  amateurs  are  frequent  and  often 
exert  useful  influence. 

Music-schools  of  various  grade  have  multiplied  in  the  chief  cities  and 
towns.  Most  of  these  are  independent  business  ventures,  but  some  exist 
as  parts  of  the  educational  system  of  colleges  and  universities.  Ever 
since  the  time  of  Lowell  Mason  (d.  1872),  working  in  Boston  from 
1828,  elementary  music  has  found  place  in  some  of  the  public  schools. 
Of  late  years,  owing  to  the  able  efforts  of  several  advocates  in  different 
sections,  this  line  of  effort  has  been  greatly  extended,  so  that  now  it 
affects  the  schools  in  hundreds  of  places.  Energetic  work  is  in  progress 
to  standardize  school  instruction  and  to  bring  it  into  relation  with  the 
courses  offered  in  higher  institutions.  Several  colleges  accept  musical 
attainments  as  qualifications  for  admission  and  many  give  credit  for 
musical  courses  as  for  other  subjects.  Musical  pedagogy  along  routine 
lines  seems  likely  to  be  increasingly  affected  by  this  institutional  work. 

Among  national  societies  one  of  the  most  efficient  is  the  American 
Guild  of  Organists  (incorporated  in  1896),  which  confers  certificates  on 
examination,  holds  musical  services  in  several  cities  and  encourages  com- 
position by  prize  contests.  The  aim  of  the  Manuscript  Society  (formed 
in  1888)  is  to  foster  original  composition  in  all  styles.  The  Music 
Teachers'1  National  Association  (founded  in  1876)  was  designed  to  band 
together  private  teachers  for  mutual  benefit.  At  times  it  has  succeeded 
in  exerting  useful  influence,  though  its  original  function  has  been  chiefly 
transferred  to  the  ten  or  more  state  associations,  most  of  which  were 
formed  at  its  instigation.  At  present  the  Association  is  serving  as  a 
useful  clearing-house  for  the  discussion  of  practical  questions  regarding 
system  in  musical  pedagogy.  With  it  is  loosely  affiliated  the  small  circle 
of  members  of  the  Internationale  Musik-Gesellschaft,  who  look  forward  to 
establishing  an  active  American  branch  of  that  society. 

Several  of  the  great  libraries,  notably  the  Library  of  Congress  in 
Washington,  the  Public  Libraries  of  New  York,  Boston,  Chicago  and 
many  other  cities,  and  those  of  several  universities,  have  given  attention 


650 


THE  LATER  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


to  the  gathering  of  scholarly  musical  literature  of  several  classes.  The 
collection  of  instruments  at  the  Metropolitan  Museum  in  New  York  is 
famous  as  one  of  the  largest  and  best-arranged  in  the  world ; others 
of  importance  are  at  the  University  of  Michigan,  Ann  Arbor,  and  at  the 
National  Museum  in  Washington. 

In  touching  upon  the  status  of  composition  in  America  it  is 
necessary  to  bear  in  mind  one  or  two  factors  that  have  greatly 
affected  its  development.  One  of  these  is  the  comparative 
recency  of  interest  in  the  more  advanced  forms  of  music. 
Musical  culture,  like  other  culture,  has  always  been  propagated 
from  land  to  land,  and  has  always  had  to  pass  through  a sort 
of  acclimatization  in  each  new  country  occupied.  In  spite  of 
the  advancement  of  certain  central  cities,  this  is  its  stage  in  the 
United  States  as  a whole. 

But  there  are  other  elements  in  the  case.  Among  these  is 
the  extremely  heterogeneous  character  of  American  population. 
In  the  pioneer  days  all  the  cultured  inhabitants  were  immi- 
grants, coming  from  diverse  points  of  origin.  In  the  middle 
period,  before  the  War,  homogeneity  was  being  established,  but 
upon  different  lines  in  different  sections.  As  these  sections 
have  since  been  drawing  together,  a new  flood  of  immigration 
has  set  in,  so  extensive  and  varied  as  to  show  that  the  com- 
plexity of  races  and  mental  aptitudes  is  to  be  far  greater  than 
ever  before.  Because  of  all  this  American  music  has  never  had 
a native  or  national  basis  like  that  found  in  practically  all 
European  countries.  There  is  no  unconscious  folk-music  that 
embodies  the  national  temperament  and  life.  Furthermore, 
American  taste  in  music  has  been  made  extraordinarily  eclectic, 
because  all  along  subjected  to  the  impact  of  all  kinds  of  in- 
fluences, some  excellent,  some  inferior,  coming  from  every 
principal  European  country.  Hitherto,  perhaps,  this  fact  has 
told  against  the  normal  unfolding  of  a national  style.  As 
knowledge  increases,  however,  it  is  possible  that  this  very  cos- 
mopolitanism of  experience  may  bring  forth  a better  blending 
of  existing  styles  into  one  expressive  of  the  most  modern  feel- 
ing than  could  be  reached  in  any  other  country.  Yet  against 
the  hope  of  unification,  it  must  be  confessed,  stands  the  fact  of 
the  enormous  extent  of  the  country,  the  great  distances  be- 
tween the  large  cities,  which  are  natural  centres  for  music,  the 
diverse  interests  of  the  different  sections,  and  the  consequent 


MUSIC  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES 


65I 


difficulty  of  interchanging  ideas  and  products.  Such  consoli- 
dation of  musical  life  as  exists  in  Germany  or  England,  for 
example,  is  at  present  utterly  out  of  the  question  here. 

From  the  long  list  of  native-born  American  composers  the  selection  of 
names  for  mention  is  not  easy.  The  following  are  well-known  representa- 
tives : — 

John  Knowles  Paine  (d.  1906),  from  1862  teacher  and  from  1876  professor 
at  Harvard  University,  was  not  only  an  expert  organist,  but  an  abundant  and 
striking  composer,  with  2 symphonies,  2 symphonic  poems,  chamber  music, 
the  oratorio  St.  Peter , incidental  music  to  Sophokles’  ‘ CEdipus  Tyrannus,’ 
a mass,  several  choral  cantatas,  and  many  shorter  works.  In  the  same  year 
with  him  (1839)  was  horn  Dudley  Buck,  in  recent  years  a prominent  church 
musician  in  Brooklyn,  with  many  effective  choral  works,  including  the  oratorio 
The  Light  of  Asia  (1885),  many  choir-pieces,  organ  music,  overtures  and  a 
comic  opera  (1880).  To  the  next  generation  belong  William  Wallace  Gil- 
christ, born  in  1846,  since  1873  a prominent  organist  and  conductor  in  Phila- 
delphia, with  a symphony,  an  orchestral  suite,  much  chamber  music,  several 
prize  works  for  chorus,  etc. ; Frederick  Grant  Gleason  (d.  1903),  from  1877 
working  at  Chicago,  with  2 operas,  symphonic  poems,  cantatas,  a piano- 
concerto,  chamber  music,  etc. ; Arthur  Foote,  born  in  1853,  since  1878 
an  organist  in  Boston,  with  many  chamber  works,  overtures,  suites  for 
orchestra  and  for  piano,  cantatas,  part-songs  and  songs ; George  Whitfield 
Chadwick,  born  in  1854,  since  1897  at  the  head  of  the  New  England  Conser- 
vatory at  Boston,  with  3 symphonies,  several  overtures  and  symphonic  sketches, 
string-quartets,  choral  cantatas,  songs,  etc. ; Edward  MacDowell  (d.  1908), 
born  in  1861,  thus  far  the  most  gifted  of  the  American  group,  a fine  pianist 
and  fertile  composer,  with  4 symphonic  poems,  2 orchestral  suites,  important 
piano-sonatas,  2 piano-concertos,  many  lesser  pieces,  numerous  songs,  etc. ; 
and  Horatio  Parker,  born  in  1863,  since  1894  professor  at  Yale  University, 
with  the  oratorios  Hora  novissima  (1893)  and  St.  Christopher  (1896),  many 
choral  cantatas,  a symphony  and  overtures,  organ-pieces  and  songs.  Promi- 
nent among  the  many  younger  writers  are  Henry  K.  Hadley,  organist  at  Garden 
City,  N.Y.,  and  Frederick  Shepherd  Converse  of  Harvard  University,  both 
born  in  1871,  and  both  successful  with  orchestral  writing. 

Without  attempting  any  comprehensive  statement  regarding  musicians  of 
foreign  birth,  Charles  Martin  Loeffler,  born  in  Alsace  in  1861,  may  be  cited  as 
a single  example  of  one  who  has  secured  special  attention  for  his  original 
orchestral  and  chamber  works. 

Among  the  heads  of  musical  departments  in  universities,  besides  those 
noted  above,  are  Hugh  Archibald  Clarke,  born  in  1839,  at  the  University  of 
Pennsylvania,  Philadelphia,  Albert  Augustus  Stanley,  born  in  1851,  at  the 
University  of  Michigan,  Ann  Arbor,  George  Albert  Parker,  born  in  1856,  at 
Syracuse  (N.Y.)  University,  Peter  Christian  Lutkin,  born  in  1858,  at  North- 
western University,  Evanston,  111.,  and  Rossetter  Gleason  Cole,  born  in  1866, 
at  the  University  of  Wisconsin,  Madison.  Many  other  able  musical  educators 
are  in  service  at  various  colleges,  not  to  speak  of  the  efficient  heads  of  large 
conservatories  in  many  cities. 


652 


THE  LATER  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


Conspicuous  among  those  who  have  written  upon  historical  or  critical  top- 
ics are  William  Foster  Apthorp  and  Louis  Charles  Elson,  both  of  Boston  and 
both  born  in  1848,  Edward  Dickinson  of  Oberlin,  born  in  1853,  Henry  Edward 
Krehbiel  and  Henry  Theophilus  Finck  of  New  York,  with  Philip  Hale  of  Bos- 
ton, all  born  in  1854,  William  James  Henderson  of  New  York,  born  in  1855, 
James  Gibbons  Huneker  of  New  York,  born  in  i860,  Richard  Aldrich  of 
New  York,  born  in  1863,  Oscar  George  Sonneck  of  the  Library  of  Congress, 
Washington,  and  Daniel  Gregory  Mason  of  New  York,  both  born  in  1873.  An 
acute  and  original  theorist  is  Percy  Goetschius  of  New  York,  born  in  1853. 

234.  Some  Final  Words. — As  one  reviews  the  path  through 
the  centuries  by  which  music  has  attained  its  present  expansion 
and  power,  various  reflections  are  suggested. 

Some  of  these  pertain  to  the  magnitude  and  multiformity  of 
musical  efforts  and  interests.  An  individual  musician  or  music- 
lover,  being  naturally  engaged  with  but  a few  phases  of  musical 
art,  is  apt  not  to  realize  what  lies  beyond  his  own  immediate 
sphere.  Very  few  can  expect  to  be  personally  familiar  with  all 
the  details  of  even  any  large  division  of  the  total  field,  since  in 
each  of  the  important  branches  of  the  art  the  workers  are 
counted  by  hundreds  and  the  works  by  thousands  or  myriads. 
The  important  point  to  be  borne  in  mind  is  that  it  is  possible, 
even  without  first-hand  knowledge  of  all  the  data  in  detail,  to 
secure  a vivid  and  useful  knowledge  of  the  large  outlines  of 
musical  evolution,  with  a practical  scheme  of  thought  regarding 
epochs  and  movements,  into  which  whatever  detailed  knowledge 
is  obtainable  may  be  fitted.  The  first  great  utility  of  music- 
history  is  to  supply  the  perspectives  whereby  persons  and  things 
may  be  seen  in  their  relations  as  to  time,  quality  and  potency. 
The  art  of  music  has  become  what  it  is,  not  by  the  miraculous 
intervention  of  a score  or  so  of  ‘great  composers,’  but  by  the 
irresistible  momentum  of  large  intellectual  and  emotional  forces 
that  take  hold  of  nations,  periods  and  classes  of  mind.  It  is 
emphatically  the  function  of  history  to  help  in  discerning  what 
these  forces  are  and  how  they  have  operated.  Furthermore, 
the  many  aspects  of  music  as  a large  social  fact  are  not  discon- 
nected, but  organically  associated.  They  interweave  and  inter- 
act, often  in  subtle  and  unexpected  ways.  The  humbler  are 
not  always  insignificant,  nor  the  relatively  peculiar  and  re- 
stricted always  without  influence.  No  just  view  of  music  or 
musicianship  can  afford  to  disdain  or  ignore  any  side  of  the 


CONCLUSION 


653 


subject,  however  distant  from  the  standpoint  of  the  observer 
himself.  The  instrumentalist  cannot  say  to  the  vocalist,  “ I 
have  no  need  of  you,”  nor  the  operatic  singer  to  the  critic,  nor 
the  theorist  to  the  maker  of  instruments,  nor  the  genius  in  com- 
position to  the  promoter  of  interest  among  amateurs.  The 
world  of  music  is  a cosmos,  or,  to  change  the  figure,  a living 
organism.  Its  magnitude  and  multiformity  are  appalling,  but, 
happily,  historical  thought  may  learn  so  to  regard  it  all  that  it 
shall  seem  to  have  vital  unity  and  coherence. 

Again,  all  thoughtful  study  of  music  involves  endless  ques- 
tions about  the  worth  of  styles  and  works,  especially  those  now 
current.  In  the  process  of  the  ages  certain  artistic  convictions 
have  been  reached  and  the  most  ambitious  artistic  effort  is  now 
put  forth  in  some  accord  with  them,  while  formal  criticism 
stands  by  to  utter  opinions  for  or  against  these  ‘ tendencies  of 
the  age.’  Now,  criticism  and  history  are  not  interchangeable 
terms.  They  certainly  are  mental  products  arising  from  dis- 
tinct operations,  even  when  concerned  about  the  same  objects 
of  thought.  But  they  cannot  be  dissociated  with  safety.  This 
is  plainly  true  of  formal  criticism,  which  expresses  itself  authori- 
tatively in  writing.  It  is  also  true  of  the  infinitely  more  abun- 
dant exercise  of  private  judgment  and  taste,  which  is  apt  to  be 
unreflective  and  irresponsible.  The  critical  attitude,  however 
adopted,  should  not  be  the  slave  of  history  in  that  it  should 
seek  to  impose  upon  to-day  the  rules  and  standards  of  some  by- 
gone age.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  in  judging  the  present  it 
should  be  fully  aware  of  the  process  by  which  what  now  exists 
has  been  reached,  so  as  to  appreciate  it  not  simply  as  it  seems, 
but  as  it  is  historically.  Sudden  judgments  from  momentary 
impression  are  valueless,  and  so-called  culture  which  is  merely 
based  upon  such  judgments  is  at  least  shallow,  if  not  false. 
The  vast  majority  of  musicians  and  amateurs  are  incessantly 
viewing  music  from  some  critical  standpoint.  It  could  be  de- 
sired that  more  of  them  had  gained  enough  historical  sense  and 
perspective  to  know  that  some  ‘ novelties  ’ are  not  new,  some 
* triumphs  ’ not  unprecedented,  that  specialties  — even  the  greater 
ones  — are  not  the  whole  of  musical  art,  and  that  musicianship 
is  not  only  many-sided,  but  deep.  What  is  thus  true  of  the 
social  and  public  judgments  that  go  to  make  up  ‘popular  inter- 
est in  music,’  is  still  more  true  of  the  judgments  and  aspirations 


654 


THE  LATER  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


that  shape  every  form  of  musical  education.  Intelligent  peda- 
gogy in  every  subject  needs  not  simply  to  provide  somewhere 
for  specific  historic  discipline,  but  to  be  shaped  and  balanced 
by  the  encyclopaedic  view  that  only  historic  culture  can  supply. 

History  does  not  deal  with  the  future,  though  it  gives 
grounds  for  hopeful  optimism.  From  its  point  of  view,  the 
musical  world  seems  to  have  been  incessantly  forced  to  har- 
monize two  great  interests,  which  are  certainly  now  before  us 
and  which  are  to  continue  in  constant  interaction  in  the  future. 
One  of  these  is  the  interest  of  ‘ high  art,’  with  its  technical 
learning  and  skill,  its  delicately  sharpened  taste,  its  aspiration 
to  stretch  the  boundaries  of  achievement  to  the  utmost.  The 
other  is  the  interest  of  ‘ the  common  people  ’ — always  sensitive 
to  music  of  some  sort,  yet  often  seemingly  devoid  of  breadth, 
depth  and  intensity  of  artistic  life,  and  sometimes  expressly 
scornful  of  the  eagerness  of  an  artistic  class  which  it  regards 
as  detached  and  extreme.  The  chasm  between  these  two  inter- 
ests is  certainly  obvious  to-day.  Yet  it  is  surely  a lesson  of 
history  that  it  is  nothing  new  and  that  ways  of  bridging  it  have 
always  been  possible.  Otherwise,  music  would  never  have 
come  to  the  world-wide  significance  it  has.  Reconciliation 
must  always  be  effected  by  efforts  from  both  sides.  The  artis- 
tic instinct  may  be  trusted  sooner  or  later  to  forsake  the  pursuit 
of  the  merely  curious  and  esoteric  for  that  which  is  intelligible 
and  impressive  to  the  typical  or  average  human  mind.  And 
the  infinite  work  of  education  has  always  been  to  keep  raising 
the  level  of  intelligence  and  feeling  so  that  the  unmusical  may 
become  musical  and  the  musical  may  become  more  finely  artis- 
tic. The  19th  century  showed  a prodigious  expansion  of  the 
range  of  advanced  musical  art,  the  pendulum  of  effort  swinging 
at  the  end  toward  what  seems  like  an  extreme ; but,  if  this  be 
extreme,  it  will  swing  back  again.  It  also  showed  a wonderful 
awakening  of  enthusiasm  in  various  lines  of  musical  education, 
technical  and  popular.  It  is  safe  to  say  that  this  side  of  music 
will  be  still  further  developed,  giving  to  the  art  in  its  highest 
forms  atmosphere  in  which  to  live  and  environment  in  which 
to  work,  and  making  more  real  what  all  earnest  believers  in 
music  desire  — that  music  shall  be  the  delight,  the  inspiration 
and  the  spiritual  purifier  of  all  peoples  and  classes. 


INDEXES 


4 


INDEX  OF  SUBJECTS  AND  PLACES 


A cappella  Style,  The,  97,  99,  101,  124-7, 
195-200,  265-9,  33°.  394-5,  605-7 
Abendmusiken  (Ltibeck),  226,  301 
‘Absolute  Music,’  407,  562,  566,  631,  636 
Academie  de  musique  (Paris),  447 
Academy  of  Ancient  Music  (London),  301, 
404 

Accademia  filarmonica  (Bologna),  200 
Accents,  Greek,  71 
Accidentals,  72-3,  159,  215 
Accompaniments,  88,  90,  106,  151, 153,  161, 
169,  171, 174, 183, 189, 195, 198,  201,  204, 
238,  240,  245,  258-60,  273-5,  279,  285, 
294,  3°5-6,  33°,  345-7,  363,  428-9,  436, 
442,  446 

Acoustics,  53,  55,  59,  244,  302,  325,  401, 
490-1,  629-30 
^Esthetics,  403,  490-1,  630 
Akademie  der  Kiinste  (Berlin),  602-3 
Allemande,  The,  155,  317 
Allgemeine  musikalische  Zeitung  (Leipsic), 
406,  512-3 

America,  Music  in,  296,  399,  474,  478, 
615-6,  648-52 

American  Guild  of  Organists,  The,  649 
Amsterdam,  142,  224-5,  619 
Anglican  Church  Music,  142-6,  212-3, 
228,  271-2,  397-9,  486-8,  611-2 
Anthem,  The  ( see  Anglican  Church  Music) 
Antwerp,  99-100,  102,  115,  141,  309,  619-20 
Arabian  Music,  41-3,  85 
Aria,  The,  173,  260,  273-5,  316,  363,  428, 
569 

Arioso,  The,  170,  274,  317,  569 
Arrangements,  540 
Assyrian  Music,  45 
Augsburg,  1 1 5,  135-6,  387 
Austria  ( see  Prague  and  Vienna) 
Autobiographies,  405,  494,  627-8 
Ayre,  The,  189 

Babylonian  Music,  45 
Ballade,  The,  379,  608-9 
Ballad-Opera,  The,  277,  285,  295-6,  382-3, 
486 

Ballet,  The  French,  180-4,  277,  285 
Balletto,  The  (see  Intermezzo) 

2 U 


Basso  Continuo,  The,  161 
Bassoonists,  469,  597 
Bayaderes,  37 
Bayreuth,  566,  635 
Bebung,  The,  307 

Belgian  Contrapuntists  ( see  Netherlander) 
Belgium,  Music  in,  555,  588,  641  (see  also 
Antwerp  and  Brussels) 

Berlin,  187,  264-5,  289.  3°3>  3°5»  379~8°. 

436,  453-4,  5 1 7-8.  587>  600-4,  619 
Bible,  Music  in  the,  45-6 
Biographies,  405,  494,  627 
Bocedization,  141,  158 
Bohemia,  Music  in,  392,  557,  588-90, 
645-6  (see  also  Prague) 

Bologna,  171-2,  176,  191-2,  200,  269,  356, 
401,  442-4,  618-9 

Boston  Symphony  Orchestra,  The,  648 
Bourree,  The,  317 
Bravura  Pianists,  536-42 
Breviary  Melodies,  65-6 
Brussels,  141-2,  466,  619 
Buifons,  Guerre  des,  287,  366 
Burden  or  Drone-bass,  The,  80 
Burmese  Music,  39-40 
Byzantine  Music  and  Drama,  60,  64,  72,  87, 
168 

Canon,  The,  60-1,  97,  99,  219 
Canonici,  The,  58 

Cantata,  The  — 17th  cent.,  173,  178,  201; 

1 8th,  257-9 
Cantata-Texts,  258 
Cantors,  202 

Canzona,  The,  116,  120,  220 
‘ Capellmeister  Music,’  331,  556 
Capriccio,  The,  220 
Catch,  The,  382-4 

Catholic  Church  Music  — early,  63-76; 
mediaeval,  77-80;  15th  cent.,  93-102; 
1 6th,  xi  5-2  7,  132-8,  140-4;  17  th, 

I77“9»  194-202,  210-2;  18th,  261,  264- 

7i»  394-7’.  T9th,  479-83.  486,  605-7 
’Cellists  (see  Violoncellists) 

Chaconne,  The,  318 

Chamber  Music,  250,  305-6,  317-20,  330, 
336,  347.  388,  407 


657 


658 


INDEX  OF  SUBJECTS  AND  PLACES 


Chanson,  The,  94,  116,  147,  150 
Chapels  — in  general,  99-100;  French 
Royal,  89,  100,  137-8;  English  Royal, 
98,  100,  142-4,  212,  271;  Papal,  99, 
122-7,  *195;  Imperial  (Vienna),  132-3, 
265-8;  Spanish  Royal,  140 
Chinese  Music,  32-5 
Chiroplast,  The,  623 
Choirmasters,  99-100 

Choral  Music  and  Societies,  599-604, 
648 

Chorale,  The,  129,  139,  150,  200-1,  250-1, 
259 

Chorale- Elaboration,  The,  219,  250,  255, 
261 

Chorus,  The  Dramatic,  169,  173,  178,  273, 
293»  363.  428,  569 
Christian  Music,  Rise  of,  63-6 
Chromatic  Tones,  72-3,  159,  215 
Church  Music  (see  Anglican,  Catholic, 
Greek,  Lutheran,  Russian) 

Clarinettists,  353,  469-70,  524,  597 
‘Classical’  Style,  The,  335-6,  341-3.  408, 
427,  495-6,  5OI-2»  5*5 
Clefs,  71-2 

Clercs  de  la  Bazoche,  Les,  181 
‘Color’  (in  notation),  79 
‘Coloristen,’  Organ,  221 
‘Colorists,’  Orchestral,  581 
Combi  nation-tones,  302 
Comedies  Franjaise  and  Italienne  (Paris), 
286 

Comedy-Opera,  The,  447 
Concentores  Sodales,  The  (London),  487 
Concertato  Style,  The,  199-200 
Concerto,  The,  240,  294,  301-2,  321-2,  348, 
388,  469 

Concerts,  Public,  241,  300-1,  347 
Concerts  spirituels  (Paris),  301 
Conducting  and  Conductors,  242,  345,  523, 
525,  585,  597,  614 

Confrerie  de  la  Passion,  La  (Paris),  181 
Confrerie  de  St.  Julien,  La  (Paris),  106 
Conservatories,  193,  447,  49°,  5l8,  523~4, 
527-8,  602-3,  617-20,  649 
Cornettists,  597 

Counterpoint  — origin,  77-81 ; 15th  cent., 
93-102,  115-27, 129, 143-50;  16th,  116- 

27,  134-8,  140-50,  159-60,  162;  17th, 
195-213,  217-28;  1 8th,  250-72,  293, 

316,  320-1,  394-9;  I9th,  479.  571. 
605-7 

Courante,  The,  317 
Cremona,  121,  235-7,  468 
Criticism,  Musical,  328,  331,  400,  402-3, 
493-4,  5IO-2»  574,  629-30,  653-4 
Cyclical  Forms,  315 
Cyclopaedias  (see  Dictionaries) 


Dances  — primitive,  25-6,  31 ; oriental, 
36-7,  46-7;  mediaeval,  102,  104;  16th 
cent.,  155;  17th,  180-2,  205,  240,  246; 

1 8th,  316-8;  19th,  534,  597-8 

Degrees,  Musical,  142 
Denmark,  Music  in,  188,  364,  382,  522,  559, 
588,  619,  644-5 

Dictionaries,  21,  156,  244,  329,  406,  494,  628 
Dilettanti,  The  Florentine,  151-2 
Discant,  79-80 

Domchor,  The  (Berlin),  518,  602 
Double,  The  (see  Variation) 

Double- bassists,  468,  524,  595 
Double  Choirs  (see  Polychoric  Style) 
Drama,  The  — primitive,  26;  oriental,  37, 
51-2,151;  mediaeval,  166-70;  modern 
(see  Opera  and  Oratorio) 

Drame  Lyrique,  The,  447,  554~5,  635 
Dresden,  131,  185-7,  201,  204-5,  277,  282, 
358,  396,  426,  440,  483,  572“4,  619 
Duet,  The,  173 

Egyptian  Music,  41,  46-9 
Eighteenth  Century,  The  — early,  249-332 ; 
later,  335-408 

Enfants  sans  Souci,  Les,  181 
England,  Music  in  — mediaeval,  81,  97-8, 
103;  i5-i6th  cents.,  142-6,  149-50; 

17th,  188-90,  212-3,  228,  238,  241; 

18th,  271-2,  289-96,  382-7,  397-9; 

19th,  486—9,  516,  610-5,  619—23,  642-3 
Ensembles,  Operatic,  273,  276,  363,  428 
Equal  Temperament  (see  Temperament) 
Evirati,  123,  277 
Extemporization,  389,  391,  521 

Fancy,  The,  155,  241 
Fantasia,  The,  116,  155,  219,  469 
Ferrara,  121,  222 
Festivals,  Musical,  436-7 
Fifteenth  Century,  The,  93-108 
Figured  Bass  (see  Basso  Continuo) 
Fingering,  Keyboard,  257,  263 
Finnish  Music,  648 

Flemish  Contrapuntists  (see  Netherlander) 
Florence,  151-2,  168-70,  174,  31 1,  619 
Flutists,  304-5,  353,  403,  469,  524,  573. 
596-7 

Folk-Music,  90-1,  102-8, 129,  150,  329,  405, 
494-5 

Form,  80,  97,  104-5,  116,  147,  161,  246, 
3 1 5_24,  335,  406-8,  492.  534,  570-1 
France,  Music  in  — mediaeval,  73,  85-9; 
1 6th  cent.,  137-40;  17th,  180-4,  210, 

228,  237,  240-1;  1 8th,  285-7,  347,  362, 

366-70,  393-4,  397;  19th»  445-51,  462, 

466-70,  550-5,  582-6,  604-5,  607,  617-22, 
640-1 


INDEX  OF  SUBJECTS  AND  PLACES  659 


Free  Reeds,  35,  354,  477 
French  Pitch,  314 
Frottola,  The,  116,  147,  150 
Fugue,  The,  116,  197,  219-20,  222,  250, 
255.  261,  316,  320-1 
Fundamental  Bass,  326 

Galin-Cheve  System,  The,  621-2 
Galliard,  The,  155,  317 
Gambists,  304 
Games,  The  Greek,  52 
Gamut,  The,  69 
Gavotte,  The,  317 
Genera,  The  Greek,  55-7 
Germany,  Music  in  — mediaeval,  89-92, 
103;  1 6th  cent.,  128-37;  17th,  184-8, 

200-10,  223-8,  237,  240,  246;  18th, 

250-68,  287-9,  335-66,  371-82,  396-9; 
19th,  424-31,  453-4,  467-8,  483-6,  501- 
28,  535-45,  556-9,  562-79,  585-8,  59i-3, 
599-605,  608-10,  618-22,  630-3,  635-9 
Gewandhaus  Concerts,  The  (Leipsic),  301, 
523-4 

Gigue,  The,  317 

Glee,  The,  150,  382-4,  486-9,  612 
Graces,  Keyboard,  319 
Grand  Opera,  The  ( see  Historical  Opera) 
Greek  Church  Music,  65,  486,  605 
Greek  Music,  45,  47,  50-60,  63-9,  72,  77, 
151,  568 

Gregorian  Style,  The,  64-7,  77-8,  605-6, 
624-5 

Guidonian  Hand,  The,  69,  75 
Guilds,  Musical,  91-2,  106,  142 
Guitarists,  470 

Hamburg,  185-8,  224-6,  262,  277,  287-8, 
290,  292,  323-4 

Handel  and  Haydn  Society,  The  (Boston), 
648 

Hanover,  185,  187,  290 
Harmonici,  The,  59 

Harmony  — primitive,  27;  ancient,  47- 
52;  mediaeval,  66,  107;  modern  ( see 
Theory) 

Harpists,  353,  470,  597 

Hebrew  Music,  - 5-6 

Hexachords,  The,  67-9,  75 

Historical  Opera,  The,  45i~5»  497.  555.  562, 

567 

History,  Musical,  17-21,  158,  244,  329,  400, 
404-5,  490,  493-4,  623-8,  640,  652-4 
Hochschule  fur  Musik,  The  (Berlin),  602 
Holland,  Music  in,  556,  5 s8(see  Amsterdam) 
Horn- Bands,  Russian,  353 
Hornists,  353,  47°.  524,  597 
Hungary,  Music  in,  557-8,  588-90,  645-6 
Hymns,  64,  66,  73,  129-30,  139-40,  145 


Imitation  ( see  Canon,  Counterpoint,  Fugue) 
Imperial  Chapel,  The  ( see  Chapels) 
Improvisation  ( see  Extemporization) 
Incorporated  Society  of  Musicians,  The 
(London),  615 
India,  Music  in,  36-9 
Institut  fur  Kirchenmusik  (Berlin),  602 
Institut  Nationale  (Paris),  447 
Instrumental  Music  — 16th  cent.,  116,  143, 
153-5,  160;  17th,  165,  214-41,  245; 

1 8th,  250-63,  294,  297-324,  341-54,  407; 
19th,  413-21,  457-78,  483-5,  487,  496-7, 
504-45,  568,  574-98,  604-5,  636-52 
Instruments  — primitive  and  semi-civilized, 
28-31,  33-5,  37-9,  42-3;  ancient,  45-9, 
52-4;  mediaeval,  75-6,  87-8,  90,  102-7; 
1 6th  cent.,  152-4;  17th,  214-8,  229-38; 

1 8th,  297-300,  305-14;  19th,  470-8, 

571,  626,  650 

Instruments  mentioned  — Accordion,  35, 
478;  Anklong,  40;  Antelope  Harp,  44 ; 
Apollonicon,  488;  Archicembalo,  157; 
Archlute,  153-4;  Aulos,  53;  Bagpipe, 
29,  37,  76,  107,  152;  Balalaika,  230; 
Barbitos,  53;  Baryton,  339;  Bass 
Clarinet,  475;  Basset-horn,  344-5,  475; 
Bassoon,  300,  342,  345-6,  57*;  Bass 
Tuba,  475;  Bathyphon,  475;  Bells, 
33,  35,  49,  353  5 Biwa»  34,  36;  Bom- 
barde  or  Bomhart,  152,  300,  346; 

Bows  for  Viols,  30,  354;  Bow- Zither, 
35;  Bugle,  476;  Castanets,  29,  33,  37; 
Chalil,  46;  Chatzotzerah,  46 ; Che,  35; 
Cheng,  35-6,  354,  477;  Chitarrone, 

r53-4;  Chiterna,  153;  Cittern  or  Cet- 
era, 232;  Clappers,  29,  35,  49;  Clari- 
net, 344-6,  471,  475,  57i;  Clarion,  152; 
Clavichord,  152,  216,  231,  307-9; 

C la vi cylinder,  388,  401 ; Clavicytherium, 
309;  Claviharpe,  478;  Concertina,  478 ; 
Cor  anglais,  300,  342,  345-6,  571; 

Crocodile  Harp,  40;  Crwth  or  Chrotta, 
74,  76,  231;  Cymbals,  33,  37,  46,  49; 
Drums,  28-9,  33,  37,  45-6,  49,  152,  345-6, 
571,  596-7 ; Dulcimer,  35,  43~5.  49.  io7, 
152,  217,  229,  231,  309-11;  Euphon, 
388,401;  Euphonium,  476;  Flageolet, 
29;  Flute,  28,  29,  35,  37,  45,  46,  49, 
53,  107,  152,  297-9,  345-6,  47i,  474, 
571;  Galempong,  39;  Galoubet,  299; 
Glockenspiel,  76;  Gongs,  29,  33,  35,  37, 
49;  Gong-Piano,  33,  40;  Guitar,  38-9, 
43-4,  i53,  230,  232,  468,  477-8;  Hack- 
brett,  152;  Harmonica,  386,  388;  Har- 
monichord,  478;  Harp,  30,  44-9,  74,  76, 
88,  107,  152,  217,  229,  231,  468,  471, 
475-7;  Harpolyre,  477;  Harpsichord, 
152,  217,  231,  238,  308-9,  345;  Horn, 


66o 


INDEX  OF  SUBJECTS  AND  PLACES 


29,  37,  152.  345-6,  57i;  Hu-kin,  35; 
Hurdy-gurdy,  74,  76,  107,  152,  231; 

Hydraulus,  53-4;  Hyokin,  36;  Ka- 
mounko,  39;  Kanoon,  42-3;  Ke- 
mangeh,  42-3;  Keren,  46;  Kin,  35, 
39;  Kinnor,  46;  Kissar  42,  46; 

Kithara,  53-4;  Kokiu,  34,  36;  Koto, 
36,39;  Kouitara,  230;  Krummhorn  or 
Cromorne,  152,  205,  300;  La-kin,  35; 
Lute,  30,  35-6,  39,  43-9,  88,  107-8,  152-4, 
229-31,  241,  297;  Lyra  (Hurdy-gurdy), 
152;  Lyra  (Viol),  233;  Lyre,  30,  42, 
45-8,  5*.  53-7,  6°.  74,  107,  217,  229,  231; 
Magadis,  53,  79;  Mandolin,  43,  153, 
232;  Marimba,  28-9;  Melodeon,  478; 
Monochord,  107,  158,  217,  231,  307; 
Moon-Guitar,  34-5;  Nebel,  46;  Nofre 
46;  Nun’s-fiddle,  107,  152,  231 ; Oboe, 
35,  37,  46,  49,  io7,  152,  297,  300,  342, 
345-6,  471,  57i;  Octave-Violin,  299; 
Ophicleide,  476;  Orchestrion,  354,  596; 
Organ,  49,  53-4,  75-6,  79,  107-8,  152, 
214-28,  403,  471,  474,  604,  607,  626; 
Orgue  expressif,  354,  47  7 ; Panmelodion, 
388;  Pan’s-pipe,  28-9,  35,  46,  49,  53, 
107;  Pantaleon,  31 1;  Phorminx,  53; 
Piano,  217,  231,  250,  309-12,  336,  373, 
385-8,  407,  471-4,  497;  Piccolo,  298, 
345,  571;  Pipa,  34-6;  Pochette,  236; 
Portatives,  216-7;  Positives,  216-7, 
607;  Psaltery,  46,  152;  Ranat,  39,  41; 
Rebab,  43-4;  Rebec,  230,  233;  Re- 
corder, 152,  298-9;  Reed-Organ,  35, 
354,  471,  477;  Regal,  216-7;  Rotta  or 
Rotte,  74,  76;  Salpinx,  53;  Samisen, 
34,  36;  San-heen,  35;  Santir,  43“4, 
45;  Sarrusophone,  596;  Saxhorn,  Saxo- 
phone, Saxotromba,  475-6;  Schalmey 
or  Shawm,  76,  152,  300,  346;  Seraphine, 
478;  Serpent,  300;  Sho,  35-6;  Sis- 
trum,  46,  49;  Sitar,  38-9;  Soung,  39; 
Spinet,  217,  309;  Stone-Piano,  33; 

Syrinx  ( see  Pan’s-pipe);  Tambura,  43; 
Theorbo,  153-4,  241,  297;  Timpani, 
345-6,  57i,  596-7;  Trigon,  49,  53; 
Trochleon,  478;  Trombone,  152,  345-7, 

571;  Trumpet,  29,  33,  37,  45-6,  49,  53, 

107,  152,  297,  345-6,  57i;  Tseng,  35; 
Tuba,  571;  ’Ud,  43;  'Ugab,  46; 
Uranion,  388;  Ur-heen,  34-6;  Vielle, 
233;  Vina,  38-9;  Viol,  30,  35,  38-9, 
42-3,  49,  74,  76,  88,  107,  152-3,  214,  229, 
231-8,  354;  Viol,  Bass,  or  Double- 
Bass,  346;  Viola  d’amore,  38,  233,  236, 
339;  Viola  da  braccio,  233;  Viola  da 
gamba,  233,  236,  297,  299,  346;  Viola 
pomposa,  253,  299;  Violetta  marina, 
303 ; Violin,  231-8,  250,  297,  299,  345-6, 


474,  616;  Violoncello,  233,  297,  299, 
345-6;  Violone,  233;  Virginal,  216, 
309;  Waldhorn,  596;  Yang-kin,  35-6; 
Xylophone,  29-30,  39,  41 ; Zanze,  28, 
30;  Zink,  152,  205;  Zither,  30,  35,  36, 
38-9,  40,  42,  229-31,  309,  597 
Intermedio,  Intermezzo  or  Intermfcde,  The, 
172,  284-5 

Internationale  Musik-Gesellschaft,  The, 
640,  649 

Italy,  Music  in — 16th  cent.,  m-27,  147- 
55;  17th,  165-79,  191-200,  219-23, 

235-40;  1 8th,  268-71,  273-85,  356-60, 

394-5;  19th,  438-45,  468,  535,  546-50, 

607,  610,  635,  642 

Japanese  Music,  35-6 
Javanese  Music,  39-40 
Joglars  or  Jongleurs,  87,  90 
Jugglers,  King  of  the,  106 

Keltic  Music,  76,  87,  103-4,  231 
Keyboard,  The,  107,  2x5-7,  473 
Keyboard  Instruments,  214-8,  307-14 
Korean  Music,  39 

Kreuzschule,  The  (Dresden),  572-3 

Laryngoscope,  The,  623 
Laudi  spirituali,  124,  168 
Leipsic,  202,  254,  379,  503-28 
Leitmotiv,  The,  429,  568,  571 
Letter-Names,  57-8,  72-3 
Libraries,  Musical,  21 1,  213,  495,  649 
Librettos  and  Librettists,  175,  276,  293-4, 
363,  455-6,  561,  568-9 
Lied,  The  (see  Song) 

Liedertafel,  The,  514,  600-1 
Ligatures,  79 

Literature,  Musical  — general,  19-21;  ori- 
ental, 32,  36;  ancient,  58-60;  mediae- 
val, 41,  81-5;  16th  cent.,  156-8; 

17th,  242-4;  1 8th,  324-9,  400-6;  19th, 

490-5,  512-4,  569-70,  574-5,  578,  623-30, 
652 

Lithography,  406,  425 
Lute- Books  and  Lute  Music,  138,  140,  155, 
160,  241,  305 

Lutheran  Church  Music,  128-32,  250-63, 
620 

Madrigal,  The,  116,  120,  143,  146-50 
Madrigal-Plays,  119,  121,  169 
Madrigali  spirituali,  148 
Mannheim,  303,  347-9,  35i“2 
Manuscript  Society,  The  (New  York),  649 
Mascarade,  The,  181 
Masque,  The  English,  188-90,  277 
Mass,  The  Musical,  65-6,  95-7,  116,  125-6, 
261 


INDEX  OF  SUBJECTS  AND  PLACES 


66 1 


Mean- tone  Temperament  (see  Tempera- 
ment) 

Measured  or  Mensural  Music,  78-80 
Mediaeval  Music,  63-108 
Meistersinger,  The,  91-2,  134,  158,  601 
Melodrama,  The,  287,  380 
Melody  — semi-civilized,  27,  33,  37;  an- 
cient, 46,  52;  Gregorian,  64-6;  18th 
cent.,  269,  293,  340,  375-6,  378-9,  406-7; 
19th,  419-20,  434-6,  569-71,  608 
Meloplaste  System,  The,  622 
Messel,  The,  85 
Metronome,  The,  244,  354 
Milan,  100,  122,  547-8,  618-9 
Minnesinger,  The,  89-91,  132 
Minstrels,  50-1,  76,  85-91,  105-7 
Minuet,  The,  184,  317,  343,  419 
Miracle-Play,  The,  166-7,  180-1 
Miserere,  The,  196 

Modes  — Hindu,  37;  Arab,  43;  Greek, 
S5“7.  66-7;  Gregorian,  66-7,  73,  157 
Modulation,  161,  312-4,  570 
Mohammedan  Music,  41-4 
Monatshefte  fiir  Musikgeschichte,  628 
Monodies,  The  Florentine,  151-2 
Monophony,  162,  341,  407 
Morality,  The,  166-7,  178 
Motet,  The,  96,  116,  120 
Movement-Plan,  The,  315-24,  343 
Munich,  134-5.  187,  283,  347,  566,  586,  619 
‘Music  of  the  Future,’  The,  570,  574 
Music  Teachers’  National  Association,  The 
(U.S.),  649 

Musica  ficta,  67,  159,  215 
Musical  Association,  The  (London),  615 
Musical  Times  (London),  628 
Musicians’  Company,  The  (London),  106 
Musikalisches  Wochenblatt  (Leipsic),  514 
Mutation  (Hexachords),  69 
Mystery,  The,  166-7,  180-1 

Naples,  192-3,  269-71,  277-82,  356-60, 
618-9 

Narrator,  The,  177,  204 
Nationalism  in  Music,  632,  639-52 
Netherlanders,  The,  89,  93-102,  123,  132-3, 
140-2 

Neue  Zeitschrift  fiir  Musik  (Leipsic),  505, 
511-2,  575 

Neumes,  The,  70-2,  78 

Nineteenth  Century,  The  — early,  411-98; 

middle,  501-632;  later,  635-54 
Norway,  Music  in,  644-5 
Notation  — semi-civilized,  33,  37,  43,  47 ; 
Greek,  57-8;  mediaeval,  70-3,  78-9, 
108;  modern,  620-1 
Nuove  musiche,  Le,  169-70 
Nuremberg,  91-2,  115,  136,  224 


Oboists,  304-5,  353.  469,  524,  597 
Opera,  The  — origin,  51-2,  89,  152,  166-9; 
17th  cent.,  165-93,  244-5;  18th,  250, 
273-96,  330,  336,  355-70,  377,  407-8; 
19th,  412,  424-31,  438-56,  496-7,  546- 
72,  612-3,  635,  638-48 
Opera  Bouffe,  The,  554-5 
Opera  Buffa,  The,  277,  284-5,  33°,  355,  367 
Opera  Comique,  The,  285,  367,  445-51, 
496,  550-4,  562,  567 

Opera,  The  Grand  or  Historical  (see  His- 
torical Opera) 

Opera,  The  Romantic  (see  Romantic 
Opera) 

Opera-Houses,  170-1,  182-3,  185-6,  286, 
448 

Oratorio,  The,  152,  168-9,  177-9,  194,  201, 
204-6,  250,  257-60,  291,  293-4,  330 
Orchestra,  The  — 17th  cent.,  169,  171,  176, 
199,  238,  245;  1 8th,  300,  305-6,  336, 

344-7,  363.  407',  19th,  497.  523-4,  568, 

572-93,  596,  636-48 
Orchestral  Pianism,  539-43 
Ordre,  The  (see  Suite) 

Organ  Music,  160,  194,  214-28,  250-63, 
483-5,  487,  496,  604-5 
Organists,  117,  119,  142,  146,  209-10,  212, 
220-8,  251-7,  262-5,  271-2,  294,  395-9, 
525,  573,  579,  604-5 
Organum,  The,  73,  79-80 
Orpheon,  The,  601,  622 
Overture,  The,  182,  240-1,  246,  275,  294, 
321,  348,  363,  428 

Padua,  120,  148,  155,  302 
Palestrina  Style,  The  (see  A cappella 
Style) 

Papal  Chapel,  The  (see  Chapels) 

Partial- Tones,  325-6,  401 
Partie  or  Partita,  The  (see  Suite) 

Part-Song,  The,  94-6,  116,  150,  437 
Passacaglia,  The,  318 
Passamezzo  or  Passepied,  The,  155,  317 
Passion  Oratorio,  The,  130,  204,  259-60 
Pavan,  The,  155,  317 
Pedagogy,  Musical,  400,  412,  490,  497, 
535-6,  617-23,  633 

Periodicals,  Musical,  328,  406,  494-5, 
512-3,  628,  640 

‘ Perruque  or  Pig-tail  ’ Style,  The  (see  Zopf) 
Persian  Music,  41-4 

Philharmonic  Society,  The  (London),  487, 

615 

(New  York),  616,  648 

Pianism  and  Pianists,  404,  412,  457-61, 
497,  525,  529-45,  573,  578,  604 
Pitch,  Standard,  314,  491 
Pizzicato,  The,  171 


662 


INDEX  OF  SUBJECTS  AND  PLACES 


Plain-Song  ( see  Gregorian  Music) 

Poetry  and  Music,  26,  37,  43,  45-6,  50-2, 
85-92,  403  ( see  Aria,  Song,  etc.) 

Poland,  Music  in,  529-33,  560,  647-8 
Polychoric  Style,  The,  117,  120,  195 
Polyphony  ( see  Counterpoint) 

Portugal,  Music  in,  140,  21 1-2,  228,  451, 
483 

Prague,  132-3,  268,  365,  395,  461,  618-9 
(see  also  Bohemia) 

Prayer  Book,  The  English,  115,  144-6 
Primitive  Music,  25-31 
Printing  and  Publishing  of  Music,  112-5, 
329,  406,  412,  495.  5i3»  616,  630  (see 
Literature) 

Prix  de  Rome,  The  (Paris),  447 
‘Program  Music,’  138,  421,  540-1,  581-2, 
631,  637 
Prolation,  78-9 
Provence  (see  Troubadours) 

Psalters  — French,  139;  English,  145 
Publishers  (see  Printing) 

Puritans,  The,  144,  189,  212 

Rant,  The,  241 
Ratisbon,  605-6 

Recitative  — primitive,  26;  ancient,  46, 
51-2;  mediaeval,  66,  90;  modern,  151- 
2,  273-4,  317,  428,  569  (see  Opera) 
Reformation,  The,  111-2,  128-32,  138-40, 
143-6 

Religion  and  Music,  26,  33,  36,  41, 

45-6,  63-7,  etc.  (see  Anglican,  Catholic, 
Greek,  Lutheran,  Russian  Church 
Music) 

Revue  et  gazette  musical e (Paris),  494-5, 
628 

Rhapsodists,  51-2,  64,  90 
Rhythm  in  Early  Music,  26-7,  31,  33,  37, 
43,  47,  52,  104 

Ricercare,  The,  116,  155,  219-20 
Ritomelle,  The,  155,  274 
‘Roi  des  Violons,’  The,  228,  303 
Roman  Catholic  Music  (see  Catholic) 
Romantic  Opera,  The,  424-31,  496,  562, 

567 

Romantic  Style,  The,  336,  424-37,  495-6, 
501-12,  515-22,  529-33 
Roman  Music,  Ancient,  58-60,  87 
Rome,  65,  73,  101,  114,  122-7,  178,  i95"7, 
222-3,  239,  269,  395,  479-8i,  607 
Rondel  or  Rota,  The,  80-1 
Rondo,  The,  315,  318,  341 
Royal  Academy  of  Music,  The  (London), 
487,  615,  619 

Royal  Chapels  (see  Chapels) 

Russia,  Music  in,  353,  486,  560,  589-91,  605, 
646-7 


Sacred  Harmonic  Society,  The  (London), 

615 

Salon  Music,  533-7 
Saltarello,  The,  155 
Sangerbund,  Der  deutsche,  513,  601 
Sarabande,  The,  317 
Savage  Music  (see  Primitive  Music) 
Scales  — primitive,  27;  semi-dvilized,  33, 
37,  39,  43  5 andent,  47,  55-7;  modern, 
160,  312 

Scandinavian  Music  (see  Denmark,  Nor- 
way, Sweden) 

Scherzo,  The,  419 
School  Music,  620-2,  649 
Semi-Civilized  Music,  32-49 
Sequences,  65,  73 
Serenata,  The,  277 
Service,  The  Anglican,  145,  271 
Seventeenth  Century,  The,  165-246 
Siamese  Music,  39-40 
Signale  }ur  die  musikalische  Welt  (Leipsic), 
5i3 

Signatures,  79 

Sinfonia,  The,  155,  274,  317 
Singakademie,  The  (Berlin),  468,  600,  602 
Singers,  Operatic  — 18th  cent.,  276-7,  294, 
378;  19th,  455-6,  560-1,  574,  648 

Singing-Teachers,  277,  623 
Singing-Schools,  Mediaeval,  73 
Singspiel,  The  German,  184-6,  277,  285, 
336,  356,  378-82 
Sirene,  The,  491 
Sixteenth  Century,  The,  111-62 
Society  of  British  Musidans,  The,  615 
Solesmes,  66,  625 

Solmization  — Greek,  58;  mediaeval,  69, 
72,  75;  modern,  141,  242,  621-2 
Solo,  Rise  of  the,  161,  198,  245 
Sonata,  The  — 16th  cent.,  116,  155;  17th, 

239,  246;  1 8th,  316,  321-4,  341-3,  348, 

388;  19th,  419 

Sonata-Form,  317,  340-3,  581 
Sondershausen,  579 

Song,  The  — 17th  cent.,  205,  207;  18th, 

336,  379-84,  408,  412;  19th,  432-7, 

497,  608-10 

Song  without  Words,  The,  436 
Spain,  Music  in,  100,  140,  210-1,  228,  397, 
45i,  483,  555-6,  607 
S pedes,  The  Greek,  55-7,  66 
Speech  and  Song,  26,  33,  50-2,  85-92,  etc. 
Srutis,  37 

S’s,  The  Three  Great  (17th  cent.),  203,  225 
Staff,  The,  71-2,  75 

Stringed  Instruments,  229-35  (see  Duldmer, 
Harp,  Lute,  Lyre,  Viol,  Zither) 

Suite,  The,  155,  239,  317-20,  348 
“Sumer  is  icumen  in,”  81 


INDEX  OF  SUBJECTS  AND  PLACES 


663 


Sweden,  Music  in,  382,  468,  644—5 
Syllable-Names  (see  Solmization) 
Symphonic  Poem,  The,  575,  582 
Symphony,  The,  341-3,  348-50,  580-93 
Synagogue  Music,  46,  64,  605 
System  — Greek,  56-7,  67;  Hexachord, 
67-9 

Tablatures,  79,  108 
Temperament,  257,  263,  312-4,  325 
Tetrachords,  33,  55 

Theatres  Favart  and  Feydeau  (Paris),  448 
Theatres  de  la  Foire  (Paris),  286 
Theory  — Arabic,  41;  16th  cent.,  156-8, 
160;  17th,  242-3,  246;  1 8th,  326-7, 

331,  336,  400-2,  408;  19th,  491-3, 

526-7,  628-9,  652 

Thomasschule,  The  (Leipsic),  202,  254,  514 
Thorough-Bass  (see  Basso  Continuo) 
Time-System,  The  Mediaeval,  77-9 
Timpanists,  524,  597 
Toccata,  The,  116,  155,  220,  255 
Tonality,  160,  407 

Tone-Systems  — primitive,  27;  oriental, 
33,  37,  43;  ancient,  47,  55—7  J mediae- 
val, 66-73;  modern,  160-1 
Tonic  Sol-Fa  System,  The,  108,  621-2 
Tonkiinstlersocietat,  The  (Vienna),  301 
Town-Musicians,  202 
Transcriptions,  540 
Tremolando,  The,  171 
Trent,  The  Council  of,  125-6,  195,  198,  242 
Tritone,  The,  67,  80 
Trombonists,  470 

Troubadours,  The,  52,  85-8,  90,  140,  147 
Trouveres,  The,  81,  88-90,  181 


Trumpeters,  470 
Tuning,  157,  312-4,  491 
Tuning-Fork,  The,  314 
Turin,  302-3,  464 

Universities,  Music  in,  514,  649,  651-2 

Variation,  The,  318,  388,  419,  469 
Vaudeville,  The,  285,  445 
Venice,  113-22,  170-7,  191-2,  198-9,  277, 
282-5,  618 

‘Veristic’  Style,  The,  642 
Vienna,  179,  186,  277,  283,  336-46,  349-50, 
355.  360-6,  378,  381,  386-90,  395-6,  413- 
23,  432—6,  467,  479.  481-3,  495-6,  556-7, 
588,  597-8,  606,  619 
Vilhancico,  The,  210-1 
Villanella  and  Villota,  The,  116,  150 
Violinism  and  Violinists  — 17th  cent.,  238- 
4i;  1 8th,  301-4,  350-2,403;  19th,  412, 

461-8,  523-4,  527,  572-3,  579,  593-5 
Violoncellists,  304,  352-3,  468,  524,  573, 
579,  595 

Virginal- Books,  155 

Virtuoso,  The,  300-5,  412,  457-70,  529-45 
593-7 

Vocal  Physiology,  629 
Vocalization,  173,  245,  276,  623,  630 

Waltz,  The,  597-8 
Weimar,  574-9 
‘Wolf,’  The,  313 

Zarzuela,  The,  555-6 
‘Zopf’  Style,  The,  288,  331 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS 


Aaron  of  Cologne,  82 
P.,  156 

Abbatini,  A.  M.,  177,  196 
Abel,  K.  F.,  304 

L-,  579 

Abert,  J.,  590 
Abondante,  J.,  155 
Abos,  G.,  271,  288 
Abt,  F.,  610 
Abyngton,  H.,  143 
Adam,  A.,  552 

L-.  393-4,  404 

von  Fulda,  83,  98 

de  la  Hale,  89,  94 

Adamberger,  V.,  378 
Adami  da  Bolsena,  A.,  329 
Adams,  T.,  488 
Adelboldus,  82 
Adler,  V.,  535 
Adlung,  J.,  327 
Adrastos,  59 
Adriaensen,  E.,  142 
iEgidius  de  Murino,  83 

Zamorensis,  83 

ASlian,  59 
A£lrede,  82,  84 
Afranio,  P.,  346 
Afzelius,  A.  A.,  494 
Agazzari,  A.,  169,  195,  222, 
242 

Agobardus,  82 
Agostini,  P.,  196 
Agricola,  A.,  100 

J.  F.,  265 

M.,  152,  157 

R.,  83 

Agthe,  F.  W.,  573 
Aguado  y Garcia,  D.,  470 
Aguilera  de  Heredia,  S., 
211 

Agujari,  L.f  378 
Ahle,  J.  G.,  207,  243 

J.  R.,  207,  243 

Aiblinger,  J.  K.,  606 
Aichinger,  G.,  136 
Alabjew,  A.,  610 
Alanus,  82 


Alard,  D.,  594 
Albani,  M.  (1),  237 

M.  (2),  237 

Albeniz,  P.  (1),  397 

P.  (2),  534 

Alberici,  G.,  244 
Albert,  E.  d’,  579,  638 

H.,  205 

Magnus,  83 

Max,  597 

Albinoni,  T.,  192,  240 
Alboni,  M.,  561 
Albrecht,  J.  L.,  402 

K.  K.,  620 

Albrechtsberger,  J.  G.,  396, 
402,  422 
Alcock,  J.,  272 
Alcuin,  F.,  73,  82 
Aldrich,  H.,  213 
R.,  652 

Aldrovandini,  G.,  179,  192 
Alembert,  J.  le  R.  d’,  325-6 
Alessandri,  F.,  359 
Alfieri,  P.,  625 
Alfonso  II.,  86 
Algarotti,  F.,  328,  364 
Alkan,  C.  H.  V.,  534 
Allacci,  L.,  244 
Allegri,  G.,  196 
Almenrader,  K.,  469 
Alstedt,  J.  H.,  242 
Altenburg,  J.  E.,  403 

M.,  203 

Altfes,  J.  H.,  596 
Alypios,  59 
Amalarius,  82 
Amati  family,  235,  237 

V.,  177 

Ambros,  A.  W.,  20,  123, 
626-7 

Ambrose,  Bishop,  65 
Amiot,  Pere,  405 
Ammerbach,  E.  N.,  13 1, 
221,  312 

Ammon,  B.,  133 
Amner,  J.,  212 
Amon,  J.  A.,  353 

664 


Ana,  F.  d’,  117 
Ancot,  J., 

Andre,  A.,  629 

J-,  379,  4o6 

Andrevi,  F.,  483 
Andries,  J.,  619 
Anerio,  F.,  127 

G.  F.,  127 

Anfossi,  P.,  359 
Angeloni,  L.,  494 
Animuccia,  G.,  124,  168 
P.,  124 

Annibale  Padovano,  117, 
119,  148 

Anschutz,  K.,  616 
Anselm  di  Parma,  83 
Antegnati,  C.,  121,  221 
Antigo,  A.,  1 14 
Antonio  di  Lucca,  83 
Antony,  F.  J.,  493 
A pel,  J.  A.,  493 
Apiarius,  M., 

Appenzeller,  B.,  141 
Aprile,  G.,  378 
Apthorp,  W.  F.,  21,  652 
Aptommas  ( see  Thomas,  J.) 
Araja,  F.,  280 
Aranda,  M.  de,  157 
Arauxo,  F.  C.  de,  228,  242 
Arban,  J.,  597 
Arcadelt,  J.,  123,  138,  148 
Arenski,  A.,  647 
Aria,  C.,  607 
Aribo,  82,  84 

Ariosti,  A.,  179,  192,  283, 
292 

Aristides  Quintilianus,  59 
Aristotle,  59 
Aristoxenos,  55,  59 
Arnaud,  F.,  403 
Arne,  M.,  383 

T.  A.,  189,  296 

Arnold,  G.,  202 

I.  F.,  494 

S.,  382,  399 

Arnulphus,  83 
Arresti,  G.  C.,  223 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS 


665 


Arrieta  y Corera,  P.,  556, 
619 

Artaria  (firm),  338,  406 
Arteaga,  S.,  405 
Art6t,  Desir6,  597 

Desiree,  561 

Artusi,  G.  M.,  157,  158 
Asanchewski,  M.  von,  620 
Ascher,  J.,  534 
Asioli,  B.,  491,  619 
Asola,  G.  M.,  120,  260 
Astarita,  G.,  359 
Aston,  H.,  143 
Astorga,  E.  d’,  269 
Aszmayer,  I.,  483 
Athenaios,  59 
Attaignant,  P.,  113,  115 
Attenhofer,  K.,  601 
Atterbury,  L.,  384 
Attwood,  T.,  383,  399,  488 
Auber,  D.  F.  E.,  412,  447, 
449-52.  55o-i 
Aubert,  J.,  286 
Augener  (firm),  630 
Aurelian  of  Reome,  73,  82 
Autumnus  (see  Herbst) 

Aux  Cousteaux,  A.,  210 
Avella,  G.  d\  243 
Avison,  C.,  328 
Ayrer,  J.,  185 
Ayrton,  E.,  399 
W.,  495 

Babbini,  M.,  378 
Babcock,  A.,  473,  474 
Bacchios,  59 
Bacfart,  V.,  133 
Bach,  A.  W.,  485,  602-3 

family,  131,  206-10,227 

Hans,  1 31,  208 

Heinrich,  208,  227 

Johann,  208,  227 

J.  Ambrosius,  208,  210 

J.  Bernhard,  209,  262 

J.  Christian  (1),  208, 

227 

(2),  209,  349, 

358,  385 

J.  Christoph  (1),  208, 

210 

(2)  209,  227,  262 

J.  C.  Friedrich,  209, 

398 

J.  Egidius,  208,  227, 

262 

J.  Ernst,  209,  210 

J.  Michael,  208,  210, 

227 


Bach,  J.  Sebastian,  202,  209, 
238,  250-61,  288,  289, 
299.  3°9.  320,  321,  323. 
33°.  336,  348,  484,  487, 
508,  581,  592,  604 

K.  P.  Emanuel,  209, 

265,  309,  323-4,  327, 
340,  348,  404,  422 

Maria,  210 

Veit,  131,  208 

W.  Friedemann,  209, 

265 

Bachmann,  A.,  354 
Backers,  A.,  385 
Backofen,  J.  H.,  353 
Bacon,  Richard  M.,  495 

Roger,  83 

Bader,  K.  A.,  456 
Badia,  C.  A.,  179,  186,  266, 
267 

Baif,  J.  A.  de,  138 
Baillot,  F.  de  S.,  463,  494 
Baini,  G.,  196,  480,  494, 
607 

Baj,  T.,  196,  269 
Baker,  T.,  21 
Balakirew,  M.,  591 
Balatka,  H.,  616 
Balbi,  L.,  120 

M.,  481 

Baldassare  da  Imola,  1 1 7 
Balfe,  M.  W.,  613 
Ballard,  R.,  115 
Baltazarini,  181 
BaltzeU,  W.  J.,  21 
Banastir,  G.,  143 
Banchieri,  A.,  169,  172,  200, 
222,  242 

Banck,  K.,  512,  574 
Banister,  H.  C.,  614 

J.  (1),  189,  241,  301 

J.  (2),  241 

Banks,  B.,  238 
Banti,  B.,  378 
Barbaja,  D.,  443,  445 
Barbe,  A.,  141 
Barbedette,  H.,  627 
Barberijs,  M.  de,  155 
Barbier,  J.,  561 
Barbieri,  F.  A.,  556 
Barbireau,  J.,  100 
Bardi,  G.,  151,  172 
Barge,  W.,  524,  596 
Bargiel,  W.,  510,  587,  619 
Barmann,  H.  J.,  469 

K.  (1),  469 

K.  (2),  597 

Barnard,  J.,  213 


Barnby,  J.,  612 
Barnett,  J.,  613 
Baron,  E.  G.t  305,  327 
Barre,  A.,  114 
Barret,  A.,  596 
Barrett,  W.  A.,  21 
Bartay,  A.,  557 
Bartel,  J.  C.,  484 
Barth,  C.  S.,  353 
Bartoli,  D.,  244 
Barton,  A.,  296 
Baryphonus,  H.,  242 
Basiron,  P.,  102 
Bassani,  G.  B.,  179,  200, 
222,  239 

Bassano,  G.,  120 
Bassevi,  G.,  304 
Bassi,  L.,  378 
Bastiaans,  J.  G.,  605 
Bateson,  T.,  149 
Bathe,  W.,  158 
Batiste,  A.  E.,  605 
Baton,  C.,  305 

H.,  305 

Batten,  A.,  212 
Battishill,  J.,  384 
Batton,  D.  A.,  451 
Baudiot,  C.  N.,  468 
Baulduin,  N.,  102 
Baumf elder,  F.,  536,  573 
Bazin,  F.,  553,  601 
Bazzini,  A.,  594,  619 

F.,  178 

Beale,  W.,  489 
Beauchamps,  P.  F.  G.  de, 
329 

Beaulieu,  M.  D.,  625 
Beccatelli,  G.  F.,  326 
Bechstein  (firm),  545 
Beck,  F.,  349 

J.  N.,  561 

Becker,  A.,  587 
J-,  595 

K.  F.,  514,  524,525,626 

K.  J.,  512 

Beckmann,  J.  F.  G.,  389 
Beckwith,  J.,  399 
Bedos  de  Celles,  F.,  403 
Beer,  F.,  470 
J-,  353 

Beethoven,  L.  van,  309, 
372,  388,  390-2,  411-23- 
424,  43°,  432,  436,  437, 
457,  482,  496,  503,  507-8, 
566,  592,  597 
Beffara,  L.  F.,  405 
Belcke,  C.  G.,  469 
F.  A.,  470 


666 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS 


Beldemandis,  83 
Belin,  G.,  138 
Bellazzi,  F.,  200 
Belize,  J.,  115 
Bellermann,  F.,  604,  624 

H.,  604,  626 

Bell’Haver,  V.,  117,  120 
Belli,  Girolamo,  121 

Giulio,  120 

Bellini,  V.,  441,  444~5.  452 
Belloc,  T.,  456 
Benda,  F.,  303 

G.,  379-80 

Bendel,  F.,  536 
Bendeler,  J.  P.,  228 
Bendix,  V.,  645 
Bendl,  K.,  557 
Benedict,  J.,  613,  627 
Benet,  J.,  98 
Benevoli,  O.,  196 
Bennet,  J.,  149 
Bennett,  W.  S.,  487,  522, 
614 

Bennewitz,  A.,  619 
Benoit,  P.,  555,  620 
Benserade,  I.  de,  182 
Berardi,  A.,  243 
Berber,  F.,  523 
Berbiguier,  B.  T.,  469 
Berchem,  J.  de,  121 
Berg,  A.,  1 15 

J.  vom,  115 

Berger,  L.,  460 
Bergmann,  K.,  616 
Bergonzi,  C.,  237 
Bergt,  C.  G.  A.,  484-5 
Beriot,  C.  A.  de,  466 
Berlijn,  A.,  556,  588 
Berlin,  J.  D.,  327,  401 
Berlioz,  H.,  542,  555,  568, 
571,  581-4,  589,  596,  599. 
601,  604,  628,  630,  631-2 
Bermudo,  J.,  157 
Bernabei,  G.  A.,  187 

G.  E.,  187 

Bernacchi,  A.,  294 
Bernard  of  Clairvaux,  82 
Bernardi,  S.,  200 
Bernardino,  117 
Bernardo  di  Stefanino 
Murer,  117 

Bernasconi,  A.,  283,  356 
Bernelinus,  82 
Bernhard,  C.,  207 
Bernhardt,  A.,  620 
Berno,  75,  82 
Bernoulli,  D.,  325 
Johann,  325 


Bernsdorf,  E.,  21,  514,  628 
Bernuth,  j.  von,  525,  597 
Bertali,  A.,  179,  186 
Berteau,  M.,  304 
Berthaume,  I.,  462 
Berthold,  T.,  573 
Bertini,  G.,  494 

H.,  460 

Bertoldo,  S.,  221 
Berton,  H.  M.,  448,  451 

P.  M.,  367 

Bertoni,  F.  G.,  395 
Bertrand,  J.,  626 
Berwald,  J.  F.,  468 
Besozzi,  A.,  305 

C.,  305 

Best,  W.  T.,  612 
Betz,  F.,  561 
Beyle,  H.,  494 
Beza,  T.  de,  139 
Biber,  H.  F.  von,  240 

(firm),  545 

Biehl,  A.,  536 
Biffi,  A.,  199 
Bignami,  C.,  468 
Billings,  W.,  399 
Billington,  E.,  378 
Bilse,  B.,  597 
Binchois,  G.,  98 
Bioni,  A.,  283 
Birnbach,  H.,  461 
Bischoff,  G.  F.,  436-7 
Bishop,  H.  R.,  489 
Bitter,  K.  H.,  627 
Bittoni,  B.,  395 
Bizet,  G.,  554,  641 
Blaes,  A.  J.,  597 
Blahagk,  J.,  423,  483 
Blahetka,  M.  L.,  539 
Blainville,  C.  H.,  327 
Blamont,  C.  de,  286,  328 
Blangini,  G.,  449,  45 1.  494 
Blassmann,  A.,  525 
Blatt,  F.  T.,  470 
Blaze,  F.,  626 
Blewitt,  J.,  489 
Blockx,  J.,  620 
Blodek,  W.,  557 
Blow,  J.,  212,  228 
Blum,  K.  L.,  431 
Blumenthal,  J.,  534 
Blumner,  M.,  602 
Bliithner  (firm),  545 
Boccherini,  L.,  349 
Bochsa,  K.,  469 

R.  N.  C.,  470 

Bockh,  A.,  493 
Bocklet,  K.  M.  von,  535 


Bockshorn,  S.,  207 
Bocquillon  (see  Wilhem) 
Bodenschatz,  E.,  203 
Boers,  J.  K.,  625 
Boethius,  60,  73 
Bohm,  G.,  226,  262,  320 

J-,  465 

T.,  474,  596 

Bohme,  M.,  473 
Bohmer,  K.,  604 
Boieldieu,  F.  A.,  412,  448, 
451,  550 

Boito,  A.,  548,  642 
Bolzoni,  G.,  620 
Bomtempo,  J.  D.,  483 
Bona,  G.,  244 
Bonnet,  J.,  20,  329 
Bonno,  J.,  266,  283 
Bononcini,  G.  B.,  179,  266, 
283,  291,  292 

G.  M.,  243 

M.  A.,  179,  192,  292 

Bontempi,  G.  A.,  20,  187, 
244 

Boosey  (firm),  495 
Bordese,  L.,  610,  623 
Bordogni,  M.,  623,  647 
Bordoni,  F.,  294 
Boretti,  G.  A.,  177,  178 
Borghi-Mamo,  A.,  561 
Borodin,  A.,  591,  647 
Bortnianski,  £>.,  486 
Boschetti,  G.  B.,  172 
Bosendorfer,  I.,  474 
Bossi,  E.,  619,  642 
Bote  & Bock  (firm),  630 
Bottee  de  Toulmon,  A., 
625 

Bottesini,  G.,  549.  595 
Bottrigari,  E.,  158 
Boucher,  A.  J.,  466 
Bourdelot,  P.,  20,  329 
Bourgeois,  L.,  139 
Bousquet,  G.,  553 
Bovy,  C.  S.,  534 
Boyce,  W.,  272 
Bradsky,  T.,  559 
Braham,  J.,  456 
Brahms,  J.,  510,  586,  591-3 
Brambach,  J.,  639 
Brandeis,  F.,  616 
Brant,  J.  vom,  131 
Brassin,  L.,  536 
Bree,  J.  B.  van,  556 
Breitkopf  & Hartel  (firm), 
329,  512-3 

Brendel,  F.,  20,  512,  524, 
578,  626 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS 


667 


Breslaur,  E.,  536 
Briard,  E.,  113,  115,  123 
Briccialdi,  G.,  596 
Briegel,  W.  K.,  207,  240 
Brinsmead,  E.,  626 

(firm),  545 

Bristow,  G.  F.,  615 
Brixi,  F.,  395 
Broadwood,  J.,  387,  473 
Brockes,  B.  H.,  260 
Brodsky,  A.,  523,  524 
Bronner,  G.,  188 
Bronsart,  H.  von,  525, 
557 

1.  von,  577 

Bros,  J.,  483 
Brosig,  M.,  607 
Brossard,  S.  de,  21,  329 
Brown,  J.,  403 
Bruch,  M.,  579,  601,  639 
Bruck,  A.  von,  133 
Bruckner,  A.,  590 
Bruhns,  N.,  226 
Brvill,  I.,  638 
Brumel,  A.,  101 
Bruneau,  A.,  641 
Brunelli,  A.,  242 
Bryennius,  M.,  60 
Buck,  D.,  651 
Buffardin,  P.  G.,  304 
Buhler,  F.,  396 
Bull,  J.,  146,  221,  228 
O.,  594 

Biilow,  H.  von,  542-5,  578, 
586,  619 

Bungert,  A.,  638 
Bunting,  E.,  405 
Buongiorno,  C.,  642 
Burbure  de  Wessembeek, 
625 

Burck,  J.  a,  131,  260 
Burette,  P.  J.,  329 
Burney,  C.,  20,  400,  404-5 
Burzio,  N.,  156 
Busby,  T.,  493,  494 
Buschmann,  A.,  388 
Busenello,  175 
Busnois,  A.,  98 
Bussler,  L.,  629 
Buttstett,  j.  H.,  227,  262, 
320,  326 

Buus,  J.  de,  117,  118,  121, 
221 

Buxtehude,  D.,  226,  262, 
301 

Buzzola,  A.,  607 
Byrd,  W.,  115,  146,  149, 
155,  221 


Caballero,  M.  F.,  556 
Cabezon,  A.  de,  140,  221 
Caccini,  F.,  172 

G.,  151-2,  168-9,  I72 

Cadeac,  P.,  138 
Cafaro,  P.,  270,  280 
Caffarelli,  294 
Caffi,  F.,  626 
Caffiaux,  P.  J.,  329 
Cagniard  de  la  Tour,  C., 

491 

Cagnoni,  A.,  549 
Caimo,  G.,  122,  148 
Caldara,  A.,  192,  266,  267, 

283 

Calegari,  A.,  493 

F.  A.,  326 

Calkin,  J.  B.,  612 
Callcott,  J.  W.,  384,  402 
Calvin,  J.,  138-40 
Calvisius,  S.,  158,  202 
Calvor,  K.,  327 
Cambert,  R.,  182-3 
Camidge,  M.,  488 
Campagnoli,  B.,  351,  523 
Campion,  F.,  305 

T.,  189,  242 

Campra,  A.,  184,  285,  286 
Candeille,  A.  J.,  378 
Cannabich,  C.,  347,  349,  351 
Cannicciari,  P.,  269 
Capella,  M.,  59 
Capocci,  G.,  607 
Cappa,  G.,  237 
Carafa,  M.,  450-1,  452 
Cardoso,  M.,  21 1 
Carestini,  G.,  294 
Carey,  H.,  295 
Carissimi,  G.,  173,  177-8 
Carmen,  95 
Carnicer,  R.,  451,  452 
Caron,  P.,  98 
Carpani,  G.,  494 
Carpentras  ( see  Genet) 
Carre,  L.,  325 
— M.,  561 
Carrodus,  J.  T.,  614 
Carter,  T.,  383 
Carulli,  F.,  470 
Caruso,  L.,  360 
Carvalho,  C.,  561 
Casali,  G.  B.,  395 
Castel,  L.  B.,  325 
Castil- Blaze  (see  Blaze) 
Castrucci,  P.,  303 
Catalani,  A.,  456 
Catel,  C.  S.,  449,  492 
Catelani,  A.,  627 


Catrufo,  G.,  449 
Caurroy,  F.  E.  du,  138 
Caus,  S.  de,  244 
Cavaliere,  E.del,  151, 168-9, 
172,  238 

Cavalli,  F.,  172-4,  182,  186, 
199 

Cavanillas,  J.,  228 
Cavos,  C.,  560 
Cerone,  D.  P.,  242 
Cerreto,  S.,  242 
Certon,  P.,  138 
Ceruti  family,  237 
Cerveny,  V.  F.,  596 
Cervetto,  J.,  304 
Cesaris,  J.,  95 
Cesti,  M.  A.,  173-5,  186 
Chabanon,  M.  P.  G.  de,  403 
Chabrier,  A.  E.,  641 
Chadwick,  G.  W.,  651 
Chalil,  85 
Champlin,  J.  D.,  21 
Channay,  J.  de,  115,  123 
Chappell  (firm),  495 
Charpentier,  G.,  641 
Charpentier,  M.  A.,  184 
Chastellux,  Marquis  de, 
403 

Chelard,  H.  A.,  558-9,  579 
Chelleri,  F.,  283 
Chemin,  N.  du,  115 
Cherubini,  L.,  356,  369,  397, 
422,  447,  448,  451,  479“ 
80,  487,  492,  497 
Cheve,  E.,  621-2 
Chiaromonte,  F.,  549 
Chickering  (firm),  474 
Child,  W.,  212 
Chilston,  83 

Chladni,  E.,  388,  401,  491 
Chopin,  F.,  41 1,  458,  501, 
529-32,  533,  539,  601, 
630 

Choron,  A.,  494,  619,  622 
Chouquet,  A.  G.,  626 
Christina,  Queen,  193 
Chrysander,  F.,  513,  626, 
627 

Chwatal,  F.  X.,  535 
Cicero,  59 
Cifra,  A.,  195,  222 
Cima,  A.,  222 

G.  P.,  222 

Cimarosa,  D.,  359-60 
Cirillo,  F.,  177 
Clagget,  C.,  354 
Clapisson,  A.  L.,  553 
Clark,  S.,  612 


668 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS 


Clarke,  H.  A.,  651 

J.,  189,  213 

Clarke-Whitfeld,  J.,  399, 
488 

Clavijo,  B.,  221 
Clay,  F.,  613 

Clemens  non  Papa,  132-3 
Clement,  F61ix,  20,  625, 
626 

Clement,  Franz,  423,  467 
Clement  VII.,  122 
Clementi,  M.,  390-1,  404, 
422,  457-8,  497 
Clifford,  J.,  213 
Cocdus,  T.,  524 
Coccon,  N.,  607 
Cochlaeus,  J.,  156 
Cocks  (firm),  495 
Coclicus,  A.  P.,  157 
Cocq,  J.  de  ( see  G alius) 
Coelho,  M.  R.,  228 
Coenen,  F.,  619 

J.  M.,  597 

Colasse,  P.,  184 
Cole,  R.  G.,  651 
Coleridge-Taylor,  S.,  643 
Colin,  P.,  138 
Collin,  L.,  20 

Colonna,  G.  P.,  179,  199- 
200 

Commer,  F.,  604 
Compere,  L.,  101 
Concone,  G.,  623 
Conradi,  J.  G.,  185 
Conti,  C.,  548 

F.,  266,  267,  283 

G.,  294 

Converse,  F.  S.,  651 
Cooke,  B.,  384 
H.,  212 

R-,  384 

T.  S.,  489 

Cooper,  G.,  612 
Coperario,  J.,  189 
Coppola,  P.  A.,  548 
Coqueau,  C.  P.,  403 
Cordans,  B.,  269 
Corelli,  A.,  239,  292,  299, 
322,  350,  462 
Cornachioli,  G.,  172 
Cornelius,  P.,  512,  577 
Cornell,  J.  H.,  615 
Cornet,  P.,  221 

S.,  141 

Corsi,  J.,  1 51 
Cossmann,  B.,  579 
Costa,  A.  da,  212 
M.,  612,  615 


Cotton,  J.,  82,  84 
Cottrau,  G.  L.,  610 
Couperin,  F.  (1),  228 

F.  (2),  319 

Courtois,  J.,  138 
Cousin,  J.,  102 
Cousineau,  P.  J.,  475 
Coussemaker,  E.  H.  de,  625 
Cousser  ( see  Kusser) 
Coverdale,  M.,  145 
Coward,  J.,  612 
Cowen,  F.  H.,  643 
Cozando,  L.,  244 
Cramer,  J.  B.,  392,  404,  457 
Cranz  (firm),  495 
Crecquillon,  T.,  141 
Crescentini,  G.,  378 
Crespel,  G.,  102 
Cristofori,  B.,  310-1 
Crivelli,  G.,  456 
Croce,  G.,  119 
Croes,  H.  J.  de,  264 
Croft,  W.,  271 
Cross,  M.  H.,  616 
Crotch,  W.,  399,  487-8,  493 
Cruciati,  M.,  178 
Criiger,  J.,  203,  243 
Cruz,  F.  da,  212 
Cui,  C.,  591,  647 
Curschmann,  K.  F.,  610 
Curwen,  J.,  622 
Cusins,  W.,  614 
Cuzzoni,  F.,  294 
Czernohorsky,  B.,  268 
Czerny,  K.,  423.  457.  461, 
628 

Dalberg,  Von,  brothers,  403 
Dalvimare,  M.  P.,  470 
Damian,  478 
Damm,  F.,  536 
Damoreau,  C.,  560 
Damrosch,  L.,  578,  579 
Danby,  J.,  384 
Danckerts,  G.,  123,  157 
Dancla,  C.,  594 
Danican-Philidor  family, 
3°4 

F.  A.,  304,  367 

Danjou,  F.,  625 
Danner,  C.,  352 
Dannreuther,  E.,  21 
Dargomyzski,  A.,  560,  591 
Daser,  L.,  135,  260 
Daube,  J.  F.,  327 
Dauprat,  L.  F.,  470 
Daussoigne-M6hul,  L.  J., 
619 


Dauvergne,  A.,  287 
Davey,  H.,  98 
David,  F&iden,  43.  554, 
585 

Ferdinand,  523,  524, 

527,  594 

S.,  554 

Davidow,  K.,  524,  620 
Davy,  J.,  489 

R.,  143,  260 

Day,  A.,  629 
Debain,  A.  F.,  477 

(firm),  545 

Debussy,  C.,  641 
Dedekind,  H.,  131 
Defies,  L.  P.,  554 
Dehn,  S.,  494,  629 
Deiters,  H.,  603,  630 
Del&tre,  P.  J.,  142 
Deldevez,  E.  M.  E.,  585 
Delezenne,  C.  E.  J.,  629 
Delibes,  L.,  554 
Delioux,  C.,  534 
Delle  Sedie,  E.,  623 
Delmotte,  H.  F.,  627 
Demantius,  C.,  202,  260 
Demunck,  E.,  579 
Denner,  J.  C.,  346 
Deppe,  L.,  536 
Deprosse,  A.,  536 
Descartes,  R.,  244 
Desmarets,  H.,  184 
Des  Pres,  J.,  96,  101,  117, 

123 

Dessauer,  J.,  557,  610 
Destouches,  A.  C.,  184,  285, 

286 

Dettmer,  W.,  574 
Devienne,  F.,  353 
Devrient,  E.,  627 
Diabelli  (firm),  495 
Dibdin,  C.,  383 
Dickinson,  E.,  21,  652 
Diderot,  D.,  287,  325 
Didymos,  59 
Diem,  J.,  595 
Dies,  A.,  494 
Dietrich,  A.,  510 

S.,  131 

Dietz,  J.  C.,  478 
Dilliger,  J.,  204 
Dio,  59 

Diogenes  Laertios,  59 
Diruta,  A.,  197 

G.,  158,  222 

Ditson  (firm),  616 
Ditters  von  Dittersdorf,  K., 

349,  365.  381,  405 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS 


669 


Divitis  (see  Riche) 

Dizi,  F.,  470 
Dlabacz,  G.  J.,  494 
Dobnek  (see  Cochlaeus) 
Dobrzynski,  I.  F.,  532 
Dohler,  T.,  535 
Doles,  J.  F.,  399 
Domart,  P.  de,  98 
Dommer,  A.  von,  20,  628 
Donati,  I.,  200 
Donato,  B.,  117,  119 
Doni,  A.  F.,  157 

G.  B.,  243 

Donizetti,  G.,  441,  444~5i 
452 

Door,  A.,  545 
Doppler,  F.,  557,  596 

K.,  558,  596 

Dorffel,  A.,  514 
Dorico,  V.,  1 14 
Doring,  G.,  625,  626 

H.,  536,  573 

Dorn,  A.,  536 

H.,  558,  603 

Dotzauer,  F.,  468,  573 
Dourlen,  V.,  493 
Dowland,  J.,  149,  157 
Draeseke,  F.,  573,  578,  639 
Draghi,  A.,  179,  186 
Dragonetti,  D.,  353 
Dragoni,  G.  A.,  127 
Draud,  G.,  244 
Drechsler,  J.,  423,  483,  606 
Dresel,  O.,  616 
Dreyschock,  A.,  538 

R.,  523,  524 

Drieberg,  F.  von,  624 
Drobisch,  K.  L.,  607 

M.  W.,  629 

Drobs,  J.  A.,  485 
Drouet,  L.,  469 
Dubois,  T.,  447.  585,  641 
Ducange,  Sieur,  21,  244 
Duchesne,  N.  B.,  405 
Duds,  B.,  141 
Dufay,  G.,  94-5,  97“8,  123 
Dufresne  (see  Ducange) 
Duke,  R.,  238 
Dulcken,  F.  Q.,  532 

L.,  539 

Dulon,  F.  L.,  403,  405 
Duni,  E.  R.,  284,  356 
Dunstable,  J.,  94,  97-8 
Dupont,  A.,  534 
Duport,  L.,  352 

P-,  352 

Duprez,  G.  L.,  561,  623 
Durante,  F.,  270,  280 


Duschek,  F.,  389 
Dussek,  J.  L.,  392,  404 
Duval,  E.,  625 
Dvorak,  A.,  619,  646 
Dwight,  J.  S.,  615 
Dykes,  J.  B.,  612 

Eastcott,  R.,  404 
Eberhard  von  Freising,  82 

J.  A.,  403 

Eberl,  A.,  389 
Eberlin,  J.  E.,  268 
Eberwein,  K.,  579 
Eccard,  J.,  131,  136 
Eccles,  J.,  189 
Eck,  F.,  462 

J.  F.,  462 

Eckert,  K.,  610 
Edwards,  R.,  145,  149 
Egenolff,  C.,  115 
Eichberg,  J.,  616 
Eichner,  E.,  349 
Eijken,  J.  A.  van,  605 
Eilers,  A.,  561 
Eisfeld,  T.,  616 
Eitner,  R.,  8,  21,  350,  604, 
628 

Eleanor,  Queen,  86 
Elers,  F.,  131 
Elewyck,  X.  V.  van,  625 
Elgar,  E.,  643 
Ellerton,  J.  L.,  614 
Ellis,  A.  J.,  629 
Eloy,  96,  98 
Elson,  L.  C.,  652 
Elterlein  (see  Gottschald) 
Elvey,  G.  J.,  61 1 
Encke,  H.,  525 
Engel,  D.  H.,  626 
G.,  604 

J-  J-,  403 

K.,  626 

Engelbert,  83 
Enna,  A.,  645 
Erard,  P.,  473,  477 

S.,  387,  471,  473,  475-7 

Eratosthenes,  59 
Erbach,  C.,  136 
Erdmannsdorfer,  M.,  579, 
586 

Erhardi,  L.,  243 
Erk,  L.,  601,  604,  622 
Erkel,  F.,  557,  610 
Ernst  II.,  559 
Ernst,  H.  W.,  594 
Escudier  brothers,  628 
Eslava,  M.  H.,  556,  607 
Esser,  H.,  601 


Essipoff,  A.,  544 
Este  family,  121 

M.,  149,  212 

T.,  115 

Ett,  K.,  486 
Euclid,  59 
Eugenius,  T.,  100 
Euler,  L.,  325 
Everard,  C.  F.,  561 
Ewer  (firm),  495 
Eximeno,  A.,  402 
Eybler,  J.  von.  423,  482 
Eycken  (see  Eijken) 

Faber,  H.,  157 
N.,  220 

Stapulensis  (see  Le- 

Febvre) 

Fabridus,  J.  A.,  329 

W.,  227 

Fago,  N.,  270,  279 
Fahrbach,  P.,  598 
Faignient,  N.,  142 
Faiszt,  I.,  605,  619,  626 
Faminzin,  A.,  647 
Farabi,  al-,  85 
Farina,  C.,  239 
Farinelli,  294 

G.,  360 

Farrant,  R.,  146 
Farrenc,  A.,  624 

L->  539 

Fasch,  J.  F.,  263 

K.  F.  C.,  398,  600 

Fasolo,  G.  B.,  223 
Faugues,  V.,  98 
Faure,  J.  B.,  561 
Faure,  G.  U.,  447 
Fayolle,  F.,  494 
Fayrfax,  R.,  143 
Fechner,  G.  T.,  514,  630 
Federid,  V.,  439 
Felstein,  S.  von,  156 
Fendt  family,  238 
Feo,  F.,  270,  280 
Ferdinand  III.,  186 
Ferrabosco,  A.,  189 
Ferrari,  B.,  176 

C.,  549 

J.  G.,  494 

Ferreira  da  Costa,  R.,  493 
Ferretti,  G.,  120 
Fesca,  F.  E.,  467 
Festa,  C.,  123,  148,  196 

G.  M.,  468 

Fetis,  F.  J.,  20,  21,  494, 
619,  624,  628,  629 
Feurich  (firm),  545 


6yo 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS 


Fibich,  Z.,  646 
Field,  J.,  457.  458,  508 
Filippo  da  Caserta,  83 
Fillmore,  J.  C.,  20 
Filtz,  A.,  349 
Finck,  Heinrich,  100 

Hermann,  157 

H.  T.,  652 

Fine,  O.,  138 
Fink,  C.,  525 

G.  W.,  513,  514,  625, 

629 

Fioravanti,  V.,  360 
Fiorillo,  F.,  352 
I.,  282 

Fischer,  C.  W.,  456,  574 

E.  G.,  491 

G.  E.,  622 

J-  C.,  353 

K.  A.,  573,  605 

L.,  378 

M . G.,  484 

P-,  512 

Fischhof,  J.,  535,  626 
Floridia,  P.,  642 
Flotow,  F.  von,  553 
Foggia,  F.,  196 
Fogliani,  L.,  157 
Fontana,  G.  B.,  240 
Foote,  A.,  651 
Forberg  (firm),  513 
Ford,  T.,  149 
Forkel,  J.  N.,  20,  400,  404, 

405 

Forster,  C.,  263 

E.  A.,  422 

J.,  606 

K.,  263 

Forster  family,  238 

G.,  136 

W.,  338 

Fortlage,  K.,  624 
Fortsch,  J.  P„  188 
Fossis,  P.  de,  117 
Foster,  S.  C.,  616 
Fournier,  P.  S.,  329 
Francesco  da  Milano,  155 
Franchetti,  A.,  642 
Franciscello,  304 
Franck,  C.,  585 

E.,  587 

J.  W.,  186 

M.,  203 

S.,  258 

Franco  of  Cologne,  83-4 

of  Paris,  83-4 

Francceur,  F.,  286 
Frank,  P.,  20 


Frankenberger,  H.,  559 
Frankh,  J.  M.,  337 
Franklin,  B.,  388 
Franz,  R.,  608-9 
Franzl,  F.,  352,  586 
I*.  352 

Frauenlob  ( see  Heinrich 
von  Meissen) 

Frederick  the  Great,  249, 
305.  335 

Freschi,  G.  D.,  175,  191 
Frescobaldi,  G.,  222 
Friederici,  C.  E.,  385 
Fries,  W.,  616 
Fritzsch  (firm),  513 

E.  W.,  514 

Froberger,  J.  J.,  223 
Fuchs,  J.,  619 

R.,  638 

Fuenllana,  M.  de,  140 
Fugger,  Barons,  135-6 
Fiihrer,  R.,  606 
Fuhrmann,  G.  L.,  242 

M.  H.,  327,  328 

Fumagalli  brothers,  535 
Funcke,  F.,  260 
Furstenau,  A.  B.,  469,  573 

M.,  573,  626 

Fux,  J.  J.,  186,  266,  267, 
283,  326 

Gabrieli,  A.,  117,  119,  148, 
221 

D.,  192 

G.,  117,  119,  148,  221, 

239 

Gabrielli,  C.,  378 

F.,  378 

Gabrielski,  J.  W.,  469 
Gade,  N.  W.,  522,  523,  588 
Gafori,  F.,  156 
Gagliano  family,  237 

M.  da,  151,  170 

Galeazzi,  F.,  403 
Galilei,  V.,  151-2,  158,  168 
Galin,  P.,  490,  621,  622 
Galitzin,  Y.,  591 
Gallay,  J.  F.,  470 

Jules,  626 

Galliard,  J.  E.,  295 
G alii  cuius,  J.,  260 
Gallignani,  G.,  619 
G alius  ( see  Handl) 

J.,  121 

Galuppi,  B.,  285,  292,  348, 
356 

Gamucci,  B.,  619 
Ganassi,  S.  di,  157 


Gansbacher,  J.,  423,  482 
Ganz,  L.,  604 

M.,  604 

Garbrecht  (firm),  513 
Garcia,  F.  S.,  397 

M.  (1),  456 

M.  (2),  623 

Gardano,  Alessandro,  114 

Angelo,  1 14 

Antonio,  114 

Garlandia,  J.  de,  83-4 
Garrett,  G.  M.,  612 
Gaspari,  G.,  626 
Gasparini,  F.,  243,  283 
Gassmann,  F.  L.,  266,  365 
Gassner,  F.  S.,  628 
Gastinel,  L.,  554 
Gastoldi,  G.  G.,  121 
Gathy,  A.,  628 
Gaucquier,  A.  du,  133 
Gaudentios,  59 
Gauntlett,  H.  J.,  611 
Gautier,  J.  F.  E.,  553 
Gaveaux,  P.,  370 
Gavinies,  P.,  352 
Gaztambide,  J.,  556 
Gazzaniga,  G.,  359 
Gebauer,  E.  F.,  469 
Gebel,  G.  (1),  263 

G.  (2),  265 

Geib,  J.,  385 
Geijer,  E.  G.,  494 
Geisler,  J.  G.,  406 
Gelinek,  J.,  423 
Gellius,  59 

Geminiani,  F.,  302,  327 
Gemunder,  A.,  616 
Genee,  R.,  557,  561 
Generali,  P.,  439,  481 
Genet,  E.,  123 
Gengenbach,  N.,  242 
Gerber,  E.  L.,  21,  406 
Gerbert,  M.,  400,  405 
Gerlach,  D.,  115 
Gerle,  H.,  136 

K.,  136 

German,  E.,  643 
Germer,  H.,  573 
Gernsheim,  F.,  619 
Gero,  J.,  148 
Gervasoni,  C.,  402 
Gesius,  B.,  131,  260 
Gevaert,  F.  A.,  555,  619, 
625 

Geyer,  F.,  604 
Ghazzali,  al-,  85 
Gheyn,  M.  van  den,  265 
Ghiselin,  J.,  102 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS 


6 7 


Ghislanzoni,  A.,  561 
Ghizeghem,  H.  van,  98 
Ghizzolo,  G.,  200 
Giacobbi,  G.,  172 
Giamberti,  G.,  197 
Gianelli,  P.,  493,  494 
Gianettini,  A.,  179,  191 
Gianotti,  P.,  327 
Giansetti,  G.  B.,  197 
Giardini,  F.  de’,  303 
Gibbons,  C.,  212 

O.,  150,  212,  228,  241 

Gibel,  O.,  243 
Gibert,  F.  X.,  483 
Gilchrist,  W.  W.,  651 
Giles,  N.,  212 
Gillier,  J.  C.,  286 
Ginguene,  P.  L.,  403,  405 
Giordani,  G.,  359 
Giordano,  U.,  642 
Giornovichi,  G.  M.,  352 
Giosa,  N.  de,  610 
Giovanni  Maria  da  Crema, 
i55 

Giraldoni,  L.,  561 
Girard,  N.,  585 
Gisbert  (see  Gibert) 

Gizzi,  D.,  280 
Glarean,  67,  157 
Glaser,  F.,  558,  603 
Glasunow,  A.,  647 
Gleason,  F.  G.,  651 
Gleichmann,  J.  G.,  388 
Gleissner,  F.,  406 
Gletle,  J.  M.,  202 
Glinka,  M.,  560,  591 
Gloggl,  F.  X.,  494 
Glover,  S.  A.,  622 
Gluck,  C.  W.,  266,  292,  336, 
346,  356-7»  360-4.  367. 
37i.  373.  377.  388,  402-3, 
406-8,  412,  424,  429,  451, 
562,  567 
Gliick,  J.,  260 
Gobbaerts,  L.,  534 
Gobetti,  F.,  237 
Godard,  B.,  641 
Godebrye,  J.,  102,  141 
Godefroid,  F.,  597 
Goes,  D.  de,  140 
Goetschius,  P.,  652 
Goetz,  H.,  638 
Gogavinus,  A.,  158 
Gohler,  K.  G.,  525 
Goldbeck,  R.,  616 
Goldberg,  j.  G.,  389 
Goldmark,  K.,  590 
Goldschmidt,  O.,  614 


Goldwin,  J.,  271 
Golinelli,  S.,  535 
Goltermann,  G.,  595 
Gombert,  N.,  140 
Gomez,  A.  C.,  550 
Goodrich,  W.  M.,  474 
Gordigiani,  L.,  610 
Gordon,  W.,  474 
Goroldt,  J.  H.,  493,  622 
Gorzanis,  G.,  155 
Goss,  J.,  61 1 

Gossec,  F.  J.,  347-9.  368, 
447 

Gottschald,  E.,  630 
Gottschalg,  A.  W.,  579 
Gottschalk,  L.  M.,  534 
Gotze,  F.,  524 

J.  N.  K.,  467,  579 

Goudimel,  C.,  139 
Gounod,  C.  F.,  554,  601, 
607 

Gouvy,  T.,  587 
Gradener,  K.,  587 
Graew  ( see  Bacfart) 
Grammann,  K.,  638 
Grancino  family,  237 
Grandi,  A.,  199 
Granjon,  B.,  115 
Grapheus,  H.,  115 
Gratiani,  B.,  197 
Graun,  J.  G.,  303 

K.  H.,  187,  264,  289 

Graupner,  C.,  288,  320 
Greatorex,  T.,  488 
Greene,  M.,  271 
Gregoir,  E.,  555,  625,  627 

J-  M.  J.,  534 

Gregory  of  Bridlington,  83 

the  Great,  65,  73 

XIII.,  65,  122,  126 

Grell,  E.  A.,  602-3 
Grenie,  G.  J.,  477 
Gretry,  A.  E.  M.,  368,  448 
Greulich,  A.,  607 
Grieg,  E.  H.,  588,  644-5 
Griepenkerl,  F.  K.,  491 
Griesinger,  G.  A.,  494 
Grimm,  J.  O.,  510 
Grisar,  A.,  552 
Grisi,  G.,  560 
Grosheim,  G.  C.,  493,  494 
Grossi,  C.,  177 
Grove,  G.,  21 
Gruber,  J.  S.,  405 
Griitzmacher,  F.,  524,  573, 
595 

L-,  579.  595 

Guadagnini  family,  237 


Guami,  G.,  117,  221 
Guarneri  family,  237 

G.,  100 

Gueranger,  P.,  625 
Guerrero,  F.,  140 
Guglielmi,  P.,  357,  395 

P.  C.,  360 

Guidetti,  G.,  126 
Guido  d’ Arezzo,  69,  75,  82 

de  Chalis,  82 

de  St.  Denis,  83 

Guignon,  G.  P.,  303 
Guillaume  de  Machau,  95 
Guilmant,  F.  A.,  605,  641 
Guiraud,  E.,  554 
Gumpeltzhaimer,  A.,  136, 
157 

Gumpert,  F.  A.,  524 
Gungl,  Johann,  598 

Joseph,  598 

Gunn,  J.,  403 
Gunther,  O.,  524 
Gyrowetz,  A.,  423,  430 

Habeneck,  F.  A.,  466,  585 
Haberbier,  E.,  538 
Haberl,  F.  X.,  606,  625 
Hadow,  W.  H.,  21 
Hadley,  H.  K.,  651 
Haffner,  J.  C.  F.,  382 
Hagen,  A.,  572 
Hahn,  U.,  113 
Hainl,  F.  G.,  585 
Hale,  P.,  652 
Halevy,  F.,  551-2 
Halle,  C.,  614 
Halle,  J.  S.,  403 
Hallen,  A.,  645 
Haller,  M.,  606 
Halm,  A.,  423,  461 
Hamel,  M.  P.,  605,  626 
Hamerik,  A.,  644 
Hammerschmidt,  A.,  205 
Hanboys,  J.,  83 
Hand,  F.  G.,  630 
Handel,  G.  F.,  238,  250, 
260,  262,  272,  281,  288- 
95,  299»  3OI»  306,  32°. 
321.  33°.  5l6,  600 
Handl,  J.,  133,  260 
Handlo,  R.  de,  83 
Hanisch,  J.,  606 
Hanslick,  E.,  591,  629-30, 
636 

Harnisch,  O.  S.,  260 
Harper,  T.,  470 
Harris,  C.,  238 
Hartel,  G.  C.,  329,  513 


672 

Hartmann,  E.  (i),  559,  588 

E.  (2),  644 

L-,  574 

Haser,  A.  F.,  486 

H.,  629 

Haslinger,  T.,  423,  495 
Hasse,  F.  ( see  Bordoni) 

J.  A.,  264,  281-2,  292, 

356,  36°.  388 
N.,  240 

Hassler,  H.  L.,  136,  148, 
221 

J-,  136 

K.,  136 

Hassler,  J.  W.,  393 
Hastings,  T.,  615 
Hatton,  J.  L.,  613 
Haultin,  P.,  113,  115 
Haupt,  K.  A.,  602-3,  605 
Hauptmann,  M.,  513-4. 

524-7,  628-30 
Hause,  W.,  468 
Hauser,  F.,  586,  619,  623 
Haussmann,  V.,  131 
Hawes,  W.,  489 
Hawkins,  James,  271 

John,  20,  400,  404 

J-  I..  473 

Haydn,  J.,  238,  309,  335- 
49.  365.  37i.  375-6, 
38i»  390,  395.  406-8, 
413,  420,  422,  48i, 

495-6,  600 

M.,  337,  349,373,395-6 

Hayes,  P.,  384 

W.,  272,  328,  384 

Haym,  N.  F.,  293 
Hebenstreit,  P.,  31 1 
Heckel,  W.,  137 
Heckmann,  R.,  525 
Hegar,  E.,  524 
Heinemeyer,  E.  W.,  596 
Heinichen,  D.,  263,  326 
Heinlein,  P.,  224 
Heinrich  von  Meissen,  91 
Heinroth,  J.  A.  G.,  485,  622 
Heiser,  W.,  610 
Heller,  S.,  533 
Hellmesberger,  G.,  595 

J-,  595.  619 

Helmholtz,  H.,  629 
Henderson,  W.  J.,  21,  652 
Henkel,  M.,  486 
Henrici,  C.  F.,  258 
Henry  VIII.,  143,  144 
Henselt,  A.,  539 
Hentschel,  T.,  559 
Herbart,  J.  F.,  490-1 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS 


Herbeck,  J.,  597 
Herbst,  J.  A.,  243 
Hering,  K.,  604 
Hermann,  F.,  524 

J.  G.  J.,  493.  5M 

M.,  122 

Hermannus  Contractus,  75, 
82 

Hermesdorff,  M.,  606 
Hermstedt,  J.  S.,  469,  579 
Hernando,  R.  J.  M.,  556 
Hero,  59 

Herold,  L.  J.  F.,  450,  451, 
452 

Herrmann,  Die  Gebriider, 
468 

G.,  579 

Hertel,  J.  W.,  406 
Hertzberg,  R.  von,  602 
Herve  (see  Ronger) 

Herz,  H.,  537 
Herzog,  J.  G.,  605 
Herzogenberg,  H.  von,  525, 
639 

Hess,  J.,  403 
Hesse,  A.  F.,  605 
Hessel,  388 
Heuberger,  R.,  638 
Heugel  (firm),  630 
Heuschkel,  J.  P.,  471 
Hey,  J.,  623 
Heyden,  S.,  157 
Hieronymus  de  Moravia, 
83-4 

Hignard,  A.,  553 

Hiles,  H.,  612 

Hilf,  A.,  523 

Hill,  U.  C.,  615 

Hiller,  F.,  521-2,  523,  630 

J-  A.,  379,  405,  523 

Himmel,  F.  H.,  393,  423, 
429 

Hinke,  G.  A.,  524 
Hinsch,  E.,  225 
Hirsch,  R.,  630 
Hirschbach,  H.,  525 
Hoffmann,  E.  T.,  430,  493 

H.  A.,  625 

L.,  349 

R.,  616 

Hofheimer,  P.,  132,  221 
Hofmann,  H.,  638 
Hofmeister  (firm),  513 
Hohlfeld,  J.,  388 
Hoi,  R.,  588,  627 
Hollander,  C.,  142 
Hollander,  G.,  602 
Holly,  F.  A.,  380 


Holmes,  E.,  627 
Holstein,  F.  von,  525,  559 
Holzbauer,  I.,  347,  349 
Holzl,  F.  S.,  607 
Homilius,  G.  A.,  265 
Hook  (firm),  474 
J-.  383 

Hopkins,  E.  J.,  61 1,  626 
Hopkinson,  F.,  399 
Horace,  59 
Horak,  W.  E.,  606 
Horn,  C.  E.,  489 
Horsley,  W.,  488-9 
Hostinsky,  O.,  527 
Hothby,  J.,  83 
Hotteterre  family,  304 
Hoven  (see  Vesque  von 
Puttlingen) 

Hubay,  J.,  646 

K.,  558 

Hubert,  N.,  620 
Hucbald,  73,  82 
Hugo  von  Reutlingen,  83 
Hullah,  J.,  613,  622 
Hiillmandel,  N.  J.,  393 
Hiillweck,  F.,  573 
Hummel,  J.  N.,  389-90, 
423,  457-8,  579 
Humperdinck,  E.,  638 
Humphrey,  P.,  189-90,  212 
Huneker,  J.  G.,  652 
Hiinten,  F.,  534 
Hutschenruijter,  W.,  470 
Hiittenbrenner,  A.,  423 

Ibach,  J.  A.,  474 
Indy,  V.  d\  641 
Ingegneri,  M.  A.,  121 
Insanguine,  G.,  359 
Isaac,  H.,  132 
Isnardi,  P.,  121 
Isouard,  N.,  449 

Jachet  de  Mantua,  120 
Jackson,  W.,  382,  399 
Jacob,  B.,  488 
Jacobello,  220 
Jacobs,  E.,  579 

P-,  237 

Jacotin  (see  Godebrye) 
Jadassohn,  S.,  524,  525,  528 
Jadin,  L.  E.,  370 
Jaell,  A.,  535 
Jahn,  O.,  514,  627 
Jambe  de  Fer,  P.,  140 
Janequin,  C.,  138 
Jannaconi,  G.,  395 
Janowka,  T.  B.,  21,  329 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS 


673 


Jansa,  L.,  467 
Janssens,  J.  F.  J.,  555 
Japha,  L.,  539 
Jarnowic  ( see  Giornovichi) 
Jehin,  F.,  595 
Jelensperger,  D.,  493 
Jelinek,  F.  X.,  596 
Jenkins,  J.,  241 
Jennens,  C.,  294 
Jensen,  A.,  510,  610 
Joachim,  A.,  561 

J-,  S24,  579,  595.  602 

Joao  IV.,  21 1,  243 
Johannes  de  Mantua,  83 

Presbyter,  82,  84 

Verulus,  83 

Johannsen,  J.,  620 
John  of  Salisbury,  82,  84 
Jommelli,  N.,  271,  281-2, 
356,  36° 

Jonas,  E.,  555 
Joncieres,  V.  de,  641 
Jones,  E.,  405 

W.,  405 

Jouy,  E.  de,  453 
Judenkunig,  H.,  157 
Jue,  E.,  622 
Jullien,  L.  A.,  598 
Jumilhac,  P.  B.  de,  243 
Jungmann,  A.,  535 
Junker,  K.  L.,  403,  404 
Jupin,  C.  F.,  467 

Kade,  O.,  574 
Kahnt,  C.  F.,  512 

(firm),  513,  630 

Kalcher,  J.  N.,  425 
Kalkbrenner,  C.,  404 

F.,  457-9.  6a3 

Kalliwoda,  J.  W.,  466 
Kamienski,  M.,  366 
Kandler,  F.  S.,  493,  494 
Kaps  (firm),  545 
Kapsberger,  J.  H.  von,  178 
Karajan,  T.  G.  von,  627 
Karasowski,  M.,  573,  626, 
627 

Karl  Theodor,  347 
Kastner,  J.  G.,  585,  596 
Kauer,  F.,  381 
Kauffmann,  E.  F.,  610 
Kaufmann,  F.,  478 

F.  T.,  596 

Kazynski,  V.,  560 
Keck,  J.,  83 
Keinspeck,  M.,  156 
Keiser,  R.,  187—8,  260,  262, 
288,  292,  301 


Keler-Bela,  598 
Keller,  M.,  396 

O.,  21 

Kellner,  D.,  326 

J.  P.,  264,  320 

Kelly,  M.,  383 
Kemp,  J.,  622 
Kempis,  N.  a,  241 
Kempter,  K.,  606 
Kent,  J.,  272 
Kepler,  J.,  244 
Kerle,  J.  van,  135 
Kerll,  J.  K.,  187,  202,  223 
Kessler,  J.  C.,  461 
Ketterer,  E.,  534 
Khadir,  al-,  85 
Kiel,  F.,  585,  587,  603 
Kienzl,  W.,  638 
Kiesewetter,  R.  G.,  20,  625 
Kindermann,  J.  E.,  224 
Kindi,  al-,  85 
Kirbye,  G.,  149 
Kircher,  A.,  243,  244 
Kirchner,  T.,  510,  525 
Kirnberger,  J.  P.,  265,  401, 
402,  403 
Kirschnigk,  354 
Kist,  F.  C.,  625,  627 
Kistler,  C.,  638 
Kistner  (firm),  513 
Kittel,  J.  C.,  398,  403 
Kittl,  J.  F.,  557,  589,  619 
Kjerulf,  H.,  610 
Klauser,  K.,  616 
Kleber,  L.,  221 
Klein,  B.,  485,  602 
Klengel,  A.  A.,  483,  573 

J-,  524 

P-.  525 

Kleonides,  59 
Klindworth,  K.,  545,  578 
Klitzsch,  K.  E.,  512 
Klose,  H.  E.,  597 
Klughardt,  A.,  638 
Knabe  (firm),  545 
Knecht,  J.  H.,  399,  402,  403, 
406 

Knight,  J.  P.,  612 
Knittl,  K.,  619 
Knorr,  J.,  512,  525 
Knupfer,  S.,  202 
Koch,  E.  E.,  625 

H.  C.,  402,  406 

Kochel,  L.,  626,  627 
Kohler,  E.,  605 

L-,  536 

Rolling,  K.,  536 
Kollmann,  A.  F.  K.,  402 


Kompel,  A.,  579 
Konigslow,  C.  von,  399 
Kontski,  Antoine  de,  532 

Apollinaire  de,  532, 

619 

Kosleck,  J.,  597 
Kossmaly,  K.,  512,  630 
Kostlin,  H.,  20 

K.,  630 

Kothe,  B.,  20,  606 
Kotzolt,  H.,  602 
Kotzschmar,  H.,  616 
Kraft,  A.,  352 

N.,  353 

Krantz,  E.,  573 
Krause,  A.,  536 

C.  G.,  328 

K.  C.  F.,  491 

Krebs,  J.  L.,  265 

K.,  572,  610 

Krehbiel,  H.  E.,  652 
Kreissle  von  Hellborn,  H., 
627 

Krejci,  J.,  605,  619 
Kremser,  E.,  601 
Krenn,  F.,  606 
Kretschmer,  E.,  573 
Kretzschmar,  H.,  514,  525, 
602 

Kreutzer,  K.,  423,  429-30, 
558,  627 

R.,  352,  448-9,  462 

Krieger,  J.,  224,  262,  320 

P.,  186,  224,  262 

Krizkowsky,  P.,  607 
Krommer,  F.,  352 
Kruger,  W.,  534 
Krumpholtz,  J.  B.,  353 

W,  423 

Ktesibios,  53 
Kiicken,  F.  W.,  610 
Kufferath,  H.  F.,  588 

J.  H.,  467 

L-,  535 

Kuhlau,  F.,  469 
Kuhnau,  J.,  202,  228,  260, 
262,  320 
Kullak,  A.,  630 
F.,  603 

T.,  535,  602-4,  619 

Kummer,  F.  A.,  573,  595 

K.,  469 

Kunz,  T.  A.,  354 
Kunze,  A.  T.,  388 
Kunzen,  F.  L.  A.,  382 
Kurpinski,  K.  K.,  560 
Kusser,  J.  S.,  187 
Kuster,  H.,  604,  630 


674 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS 


Labarre,  T.,  597 
Labb6,  R.,  220 
Labitzsky,  J.,  598 
Lablache,  L.,  456 
Laborde,  J.  B.  de,  405 
Lachner,  F.,  559,  585-6. 

606 

I..  586 

V.,  601 

Lacombe,  L.,  585 
Lafage,  A.  L.  de,  20,  624 
L’Affilard,  M.,  327 
Lafont,  C.  P.,  463 
Laharpe,  J.  F.  de,  402 
Lahoussaye,  P.,  462 
Lalande,  M.  R.,  210 
Lambert,  J.  H.,  401 

M.,  182 

Lambillotte,  L.,  625 
Lampadius,  W.  A.,  627 
Lamperti,  F.,  623 
Lampugnani,  G.  B.,  282, 
292 

Landgraf,  B.,  524,  597 
Landi,  S.,  172,  178,  196 
Landino,  F.,  220 
Lang,  B.  J.,  616 
Langbecker,  F.  C.  G., 
265 

Langdon,  R.,  399 
Lange,  G.,  536 

D.  de,  619 

S.  de,  619 

Langer,  H.,  514,  525 
Langert,  A.,  559 
Langhans,  W.,  20 
Langle,  H.  F.  M.,  402 
Lanier,  N.,  189 
Lanner,  J.,  598 
Lanzetti,  S.,  304 
Laporte,  J.  de,  405 
Lappi,  P.,  200 
La  Rue,  P.  de,  101 
La  Salette,  J.  de,  493 
Lassen,  E.,  577,  579,  610 
Lassus,  O.  de,  134-5,  148, 
260 

Latilla,  G.,  280 
Lattre,  R.  di  ( see  Lassus) 
Laub,  F.,  579,  595,  604 
Laurenti,  B.  G.,  240 
Lauska,  F.,  393 
Lauterbach,  J . C.,  573 
Lavigna,  V.,  439 
Lavigne,  A.  J.,  596 
Lavoix,  H.,  21 
Law,  A.,  399 
Lawes,  H.,  189 


Lawes,  W.,  189,  241 
Lazare,  M.,  534 
Lazarus,  H.,  597 
Le  B6,  G.,  115 
Le  Bfegue,  N.  A.,  228 
Lebert,  S.,  536 
Le  Beuf,  J.,  327 
Leblond,  G.  M.,  403 
Le  Brun,  L.  A.,  353 
Lechner,  L.,  137 
Leclair,  J.  M.,  303 
Lecocq,  A.  C.,  555 
Lefebure-Wely,  L.  J.  A., 
605 

Le  Febvre,  J.,  156 
Lefevre,  J.  X.,  353 
Legrenzi,  G.,  177,  199,  238, 
239 

Lejeune,  C.,  138 
Le  Maistre,  M.,  131,  137 
Lemmens,  N.  J.,  605 
Lenz,  W.  von,  627,  630 
Leo  Hebraeus,  83 

L.,  270,  280 

Leo  XIII.,  65 
Leonard,  H.,  594 
Leoncavallo,  R.,  642 
Leonhard,  E.,  573 
Leoni,  L.,  120 
Leoninus,  89 
Leonowa,  D.,  561 
Leopold  I.,  186,  266 
Leppich,  F.,  388 
Le  Roy,  A.,  1 15,  138 
Lesbio,  A.  M.,  212 
Leschetizki,  T.,  544 
Lescurel,  J.,  95 
Leslie,  H.  D.,  612 
Le  Sueur,  J.  F.,  370,  397, 
448 

Leuckart  (firm),  406 
Levasseur,  N.  P.,  456 
Levens,  325 
Levi,  H.,  586 
Leybach,  I.,  534 
Liberati,  A.,  197,  244 
Lichnowsky  quartet,  423 
Lichtenthal,  P.,  491,  494 
Liebig,  K.,  597 
Lind,  J.,  454,  561 
Lindblad,  A.  F.,  610 
Lindner,  F.,  136 
O,  626 

Lindpaintner,  P.  J.  von, 
431.  558 
Linke,  J.,  423 
Linley,  T.  (1),  383 
T.  (2),  383 


Lipinski,  K.  J.,  465,  494, 
572 

Lipparino,  G.,  200 
Liszt,  F.,  423,  503,  537, 

539-43,  557,  574-6,  579, 
581-5,  589,  591,  596,  599, 
601,  604,  610,  626,  630-2, 

637,  646 

Litolff  (firm),  630 

H.  C.,  534 

Lobe,  J.  C.,  513,  525,  579, 
628,  629 
Lobo,  D.,  21 1 
Locatelli,  P.,  302 
Locke,  M.,  189,  212,  243 
Loder,  E.  J.,  613 
Loeffler,  C.  M.,  651 
Logier,  J.  B.,  490,  623 
Logroscino,  N.,  285 
Lohlein,  G.  S.,  404 
Lohmann,  P.,  512,  630 
Lolli,  A.,  352 
Lomakin,  G.,  605 
Lorente,  A.,  228 
Loriti  (see  Glarean) 
Lortzing,  G.  A.,  525,  558 
Loschhorn,  A.,  536,  604 
Lott,  J.  F.,  238 
Lotti,  A.,  187,  192, 199,  283, 
292 

Lotto,  I.,  579 

Lotze,  R.  H.,  630 

Louis  Ferdinand,  393, 

423 

Loulie,  E.,  243,  244 
Low,  J.,  535 

Lowe,  K.,  437,  608-9, 

628 

Liibeck,  J.  H.,  619 

V.,  226,  262 

Lucas,  C.,  487 
Lucca,  P.,  561 
Lucian,  59 
Lucretius,  59 
Ludford,  N.,  143 
Lull,  R.,  83 

Lully,  J.  B.,  182-4,  238, 
241,  285,  346,  367 
Lumbye,  H.  C.,  598 
Lupot  family,  237 
Luscinius,  O.,  156 
Lusitano,  V.,  123,  157 
Luther,  M.,  128-30 
Lutkin,  P.  C.,  651 
Lux,  F.,  601 
Luyton,  C.,  221 
Luzzaschi,  L.,  221 
Lwoff,  A.,  560,  626 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS 


675 


Lyon,  J.,  399 
Lyra,  J.  W.,  610 
Lysberg  ( see  Bovy) 

Mabellini,  T.,  549,  607 
MacCunn,  H.,  643 
MacDowell,  E.  A.,  651 
Mace,  T.,  244 
Macfarren,  G.  A.,  487,  61 1- 
4,  629 

W.  C.,  614 

Machold,  J.,  260 
Mackenzie,  A.  C.,  643 
Macrobius,  59 
Maffei,  S.,  31 1 
Magalhaes,  F.  de,  21 1 
Maggini,  G.  P.,  235 

P-,  235 

Magnus,  D.,  534 
Mahmud  Schirasi,  85 
Maillart,  L.,  553 
Mailly,  A.,  605 
Mainzer,  J.,  622 
Maitland,  J.  A.  F.,  21 
Majer,  J.  F.  B.  K.,  327 
Majo,  F.  di,  358 
Maldere,  P.  van,  349 
Malibran,  M.,  456 
Mailing,  O.,  644 
Malvezzi,  C.,  172 
Malzel,  J.  N.f  354,  423 
Manara,  G.  A.,  178 
Mancinelli,  L.,  619 
Mancini,  F.,  279,  292 

G.,  401 

Mancinus,  T.,  260 
Mangold,  K.,  559,  601 
Mannelli,  F.,  176 
Manns,  A.,  614 
Manoir,  G.  du,  228,  304 
Mara,  G.  E.,  378 
Marais,  M.,  184,  241,  304 

R.,  304 

Marazzoli,  M.,  177,  178 
Marcello,  B.,  269,  328 
Marchand,  L.,  319 
Marchesi,  L.,  378 

M.,  623 

S.,  623 

Marchetti,  F.,  549 
Marchetto  di  Padua,  83-4 
Mare,  W.  de  la,  83 
Marenzio,  L.,  148,  149, 
172 

Mares,  J.  A.,  353 
Maretzek,  M.,  616 
Mariani,  G.  B.,  177 
Marin,  M.  de,  470 


Marini,  B.,  240 

C.  A.,  240 

Mario,  G.,  561 
Marius,  31 1 

Marjorano  {see  Caffarelli) 
Markham,  R.,  98 
Marmontel,  A.  F.,  532 

J.  F.,  402 

Marot,  C.,  139,  145 
Marpurg,  F.  W.,  327,  328, 
329,  401 

Marschner,  H.,  431,  437, 
525.  556,  558,  562,  572 
Martin,  P.  A.,  478 
Martin  y Solar,  V.,  366 
Martini,  G.,  20,  269,  373, 
400-1,  404,  408 
Martucci,  G.,  619,  642 
Marx,  A.  B.,  494,  602-3, 
627-30 

Mascagni,  P.,  6-2 
Maschera,  F.,  221 
Mason,  D.  G.,  652 

L.,  615,  649 

W.,  616 

Massaini,  T.,  127 
Massart,  L.  J.,  595 
Masse,  V.  (F.  M.)>  553 
Massenet,  J.,  585,  641 
Mathew,  J.  E.,  20 
Mathews,  W.  S.  B.,  20 
Mathias,  G.,  534 
Mathieu,  A.,  627 

E.,  619 

Mattei,  S.,  395 
Matteis,  N.,  241 
Matthai,  H.  A.,  523 
Mattheson,  J.,  260,  262, 
288,  290,  292,  320,  326, 
328 

Matthias,  H.,  131 
Mattioli,  A.,  176 
Maurer,  L.  W.,  467 
Mayer,  C.,  460,  573 
Mayr,  S.,  440,  481 
Mayseder,  J.,  423,  465 
Mazas,  J.  F.,  466 
Mazzinghi,  J.,  383 
Mazzocchi,  D.,  172,  178 

V.,  196 

Mazzucato,  A.,  548,  619 
Meerens,  C.,  629 
Meerts,  L.,  595 
Mehul,  E.  N.,  369-70,  448 
Meibom,  M.,  243 
Meifred,  J.  E.,  470 
Meiland,  J.,  136,  260 
Meinardus,  L.,  573,  587 


Meissner,  A.  G.,  405 
Mell,  G.,  139 
Meluzzi,  S.,  607 
Membree,  E.,  555 
Mendel,  H.,  21,  604 
Mendelssohn-  Bartholdy, 
Fanny,  516 

Felix,  46,  41 1,  436, 

458,  484,  487,  503-5, 

515-28,  529,  533,  599, 
601-2,  608,  610-1,  631 
Mendes,  M.,  21 1 
Mengal,  M.  J.,  470,  619 
Merbecke,  J.,  145 
Mercadante,  S.,  441,  548, 
607,  619 

Mercadier,  J.  B.,  402 
Mercandetti  {see  Generali) 
Meriel,  P.,  553 
Merk,  J.,  468 
Merkel,  G.,  573,  605 

K.  L.,  514,  629 

Mersenne,  M.,  243,  244 
Mertke,  E.,  545 
Merula,  T.,  240 
Merulo,  C.,  117,  119,  148, 
151,  221 

Mestrino,  N.,  352 
Metastasio  {see  Trapassi) 
Mettenleiter,  D.,  606 

J.  G.,  606,  625 

Meursius,  J.,  243 
Meusel,  J.  G.,  406 
Meyer,  Jenny,  602 

Joachim,  328 

Julius  E.,  616 

L.  von,  535 

Meyerbeer,  G.,  46,  452-5, 
458,  S°3»  55i*  555,  562, 
603 

Mezeray,  C.  de,  556 
Miceli,  G.,  549 
Michael,  T.,  202 
Michaelis,  C.  F.,  403,  514 
Micheli,  R.,  195 
Mihalowich,  E.  von,  646 
Miksch,  J.  A.,  623 
Mikuli,  K.,  532-3 
Milder-Hauptmann,  P.  A., 
456 

Miblotti,  L.,  610 
Milleville,  A.,  222 

F.,  222 

Mills,  S.  B.,  616 
Milton,  J.  (1),  212 

J.  (2),  1 88-9,  294, 

338 

Mingotti,  R.,  378 


676 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS 


Miry,  K.,  555 
Misliweczek,  J.,  365 
Mitterwurzer,  A.,  561,  574 
Mizler,  L.  C.,  326,  328 
Mocquereau,  A.,  625 
Molique,  W.  B.f  466 
Mollenhauer,  E.,  616 
Moller  {see  Burck) 
Momigny,  J.  J.,  492 
Monasterio,  G.,  595,  619 
Mondonville,  J.  J.C.de,  287 
Monferrato,  N.,  199 
Moniuszko,  S.,  560,  610 
Monk,  E.  G.,  612 
— W.  H.,  612 
Monopoli  ( see  Insanguine) 
Monsigny,  P.  A.,  368 
Montagna,  D.,  237 
Monte,  P.  de,  133,  148 
Monteclair,  M.  P.  de,  286, 

327 

Monteverdi,  C.,  148,  170-1, 
199,  238,  346 
Morales,  C.,  123-4 
Moralt  brothers,  467 
Morel,  A.  F.,  555 
Morell,  T.,  294 
Morlacchi,  F.,  440,  452, 
481,  483,  497.  572 
Morlaye,  G.,  138 
Morley,  T.,  149,  158,  212 
Mornington,  Earl  of,  384 
Mortaro,  A.,  222 
Mortimer,  P.,  493 
Mosca,  G.,  439 
L.,  439 

Moscheles,  I.,  423,  457-9, 

524,  527 

Mosel,  I.  F.,  491,  493,  494 
Mosenthal,  J.,  616 
Mosewius,  J.  T.,  630 
Moskowa,  Prince  de  la,  553 
Mosonyi,  558,  589 
Moszkowski,  M.,  648 
Mouret,  J.,  286 
Mouton,  J.,  137 
Mozart,  K.,  375 

L.,  352,  372-3,  403 

M.  A.,  372 

W.  A.  (1),  238,  266, 

3°9»  335,  348,  35°,  356, 
365.  367,  37i-7,  38i, 
388-9,  395,  406-8,  413, 
418,  422,  424,  429,  432, 
435-b,  458,  481,  496, 
5i5,  597 

W.  A.  (2),  375 

Mudie,  T.  M.,  614 


Muff  at,  Georg,  223 

Gottlieb,  267,  320 

Miihldorfer,  W.  K.,  559 
Muller,  A.  E.,  392,  404,  514, 
579 

C.  C.,  6x6 

Franz,  578,  630 

Friedrich,  469,  601 

Ivan,  475 

Johannes,  629 

Joh.  Christian,  388 

Karl  (1),  597 

Karl  (2),  595 

Konrad,  5x4 

Wenzel,  381 

Wilhelm  C.,  491,  493 

Muris,  J.  de,  83-4 
Musard,  P.,  598 
Musiol,  R.,  20 
Mussorgski,  M.,  591,  647 

Nachbaur,  F.,  561 
Nachtigall  ( see  Luscinius) 
Nadaud,  G.,  610 
Nadermann,  F.  J.,  470 
Nageli,  H.  G.,  493,  601,  621 
Nanino,  G.  B.,  127,  148 

G.  M.,  127,  148 

Naprawnik,  E.,  646 
Nardini,  P.,  351 
Nares,  J.,  272 
Nathan,  I.,  494 
Natorp,  B.  C.  L.,  622 
Nau,  M.  D.,  560 
Naue,  J.  F.,  493,  622 
Naumann,  E.,  20,  573,  604, 
627 

J-  G.,  358,  396,  572 

Nava,  G.,  623 
Naylor,  J.,  612 
Neefe,  C.  G.,  380,  422 
Neidhardt,  J.  G.,  325 
Neithardt,  A.  H.,  602 
Neri,  F.,  168 

M.,  239 

Nessler,  V.,  525,  638 
Nesvadba,  J.,  610 
Neswere,  J.,  646 
Netzer,  J.,  525,  557 
Neubauer,  F.  C.,  352 
Neuber,  U.,  115 
Neukomm,  S.  von,  482-3 
Neumeister,  E.,  258 
Neusidler,  H.,  136 
Ney,  J.  N.  ( see  Moskowa) 
Niccohni,  G.,  481 
Nicode,  J.  L.,  525,  639 
Nicolai,  O.,  559 


Nicolai,  W.,  619 
Nicolb  de  Capua,  83 
Niedermeyer,  L.,  437,  555, 
607 

Niedt,  F.  E.,  326 
Niemann,  A.,  561 
Nikisch,  A.,  523 
Nini,  A.,  549,  607 
Nisard,  T.  {see  Normand) 
Nissen,  G.  N.  von,  375,  494 

H.,  561 

Nivers,  G.  G.,  228,  243 
Nohl,  L.,  627,  630 
Normand,  T.  E.  X.,  624 
North,  R.,  20 
Noszkowski,  S.,  647 
Notker  Balbulus,  73,  82 

Labeo,  82 

Nottebohm,  M.  G.,  627 
Nourrit,  A.,  456 
Novello,  Ewer  & Co. 
(firm),  495 

V.,  495 

Noverre,  J.  G.,  287,  329 
Nowakowski,  J.,  532 

Oakeley,  H.  S.,  612,  6x4 
Oberhoffer,  H.,  606 
Oberthur,  K.,  597 
Obrecht,  J.,  99,  100,  260 
Ochsenkuhn,  S.,  137 
Oddo,  73,  82 
Odington,  W.,  83-4 
Oeglin,  E.,  113,  115 
Oesten,  T.,  604 
Oettingen,  A.  von,  527,  629 
Offenbach,  J.,  555 
Olsen,  O.,  645 
Okeghem,  J.  de,  99,  100, 
101.  331 

Onslow,  G.,  468 
Opelt,  F.  W.,  574 
Orlow,  G.  W.,  493 
Ornithoparchus,  A.,  157 
Ortigue,  J.  L.  d\  494,  625, 
626 

Orto,  M.  de,  102 
Osbern,  82 
Osborne,  G.  A.,  614 

J->  474 

Osiander,  L.,  137 
Othmayr,  K.,  136 
Ott,  H.,  115 
Ottani,  B.,  395 
Otto,  J.,  573,  601 
Oudrid,  C.,  556 
Ouseley,  F.  A.  G.,  612,  614, 
629 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS 


677 


Pacchiarotti,  G.,  378 
Pacelli,  A.,  201 
Pachelbel,  J.,  224,  227, 

262 

Pacini,  G.,  441,  548 
Paderewski,  I.  J.,  532,  648 
Paer,  F.,  423,  439~4°,  451, 
481,  572 

Paganini,  N.,  462-4,  496 
Page,  J.,  399 
Paine,  J.  K.,  616,  651 
Paisiello,  G.,  359,  395 
Paix,  J.,  137,  221 
Paladilhe,  E.,  641 
Palestrina,  G.  P.  da,  117, 
123-6,  134,  148,  168,  198, 
395,  605-7 
Pallavidno,  B.,  121 

C.,  187,  191 

Palotta,  M.,  266,  267 
Paminger,  L.,  133 
Pancotti,  A.,  266 
Pane,  D.  a,  197 
Panofka,  H.,  623 
Panormo,  V.,  237 
Panseron,  A.  M.,  610,  623 
Paolucci,  G.,  401 
Pape,  J.  H.,  474 
Papier,  L.,  525 
Papperitz,  R.,  524,  525 
Parepa-Rosa,  E.,  561 
Paris,  A.,  622 
Parish- Alvars,  E.,  597 
Parker,  G.  A.,  651 

H.,  651 

J.  C.  D.,  615 

Parry,  C.  H.  H.,  21,  643 

J-  (1),  329 

■ J-  (2),  489,  494 

Partenio,  G.  D.,  191,  199 
Pasdeloup,  J.  E.,  585 
Pasque,  E.,  626 
Pasquini,  B.,  179,  193,  223 
Pasta,  G.,  456 
Patino,  C.,  21 1 
Patti,  A.,  561 
Pauer,  E.,  614 
Paul,  O.,  21,  514,  524,  624, 
626 

Paumann,  K.,  220 
Pavesi,  S.,  439 
Paxton,  S.,  384 
Pearsall,  R.  L.,  612 
Pearson,  M.,  212 
Pedrotti,  C.,  549,  620 
Penalosa,  F.  de,  100 
Penna,  L.,  243 
Pentenrieder,  F.  X.,  559 


Pepusch,  J.  C.,  295,  326, 

329 

Perez,  D.,  271,  281 
Perfall,  K.  von,  559,  626 
Perger,  R.  von,  619 
Pergolesi,  G.  B.,  271,  284 
Peri,  A.,  549 

J.,  151-2,  168—9,  I72> 

238 

Perne,  F.  L.,  447,  493 
Perosi,  L.,  642 
Perotinus,  89 
Perotti,  G.  A.,  493 
Perrin,  P.,  182-3 
Persiani,  F.,  560 
Persuis,  L.  L.  de,  449 
Perti,  J.  A.,  179,  191,  200, 

282 

Pescetti,  G.  B.,  283 
Peters  (firm),  495,  5r3 
Petreius,  J.,  115 
Petrella,  E.,  548 
Petri,  H.,  523,  573 

J.  S.,  402 

Petrobelli,  F.,  200 
Petrucci,  O.  dei,  113,  114, 

14S 

Petrus  de  Cruce,  83,  89 

Picardus,  83 

Petzold,  W.  L.,  474 
Pevernage,  A.,  141 
Pezel,  J.,  240 
Pfeil,  H.,  514 
Pflughaupt,  R.,  536,  578 
Pfundt,  E.  G.  B,  524,  597 
Phalese,  P.,  115 
Phihdor  ( see  Danican) 
Philippe  de  Vitry,  83-4 
Philippon  de  Bruges,  100 
Phillipps,  A.,  561 
Phillips,  P.,  142,  221 
Philodemos,  59 
Philomathes,  W.,  156 
Piatti,  A.,  595 
Picander  {see  Henrid) 
Piccinni,  N.,  357,  360,  362 
Pichl,  W.,  350 
Pirinelli,  F.,  244 
Pierson,  H.  H.,  525,  614 
Pigue,  F.  L.,  237 
Pilkington,  F.,  149 
Pilotti,  G.,  480,  493 
Pinsuti,  C.,  610,  623 
Pipegrop  ( see  Baryphonus) 
Pipelare,  M.,  102 
Pisa,  A.,  242 
Pisari,  P.,  395 
Pisaroni,  B.  R.,  561 


Pisendel,  J.  G.,  302 
Pistocchi,  F.  A.,  179, 191 
Pitoni,  G.  O.,  197,  244 
Pius  IX.,  65 

X.,  65,  198 

Plaidy,  L.,  524 
Platania,  P.,  549 
Platel,  N.  J.,  468 
Plato,  59 
Playford,  J.,  243 
Pleyel,  C.,  474 
— I-  J-,  35°,  39°,  474 

M.  F.  D.,  538 

Pliny,  59 
Plutarch,  59 
Pohl,  K.  F.,  627 

R.,  512,  578 

Pohlenz,  C.  A.,  523,  525 
Poise,  J.  A.  F.,  553 
Poissl,  J.  N.,  431 
Polaroli,  C.  F.,  179,  192, 
283 

Polchau,  G.,  495 
Polledro,  G.  B.,  464,  572 
Polleri,  G.  B.,  619 
Pollini,  F.,  404,  458 
Ponchielli,  A.,  550 
Poniatowski,  J.,  549 
Pontecoulant,  Marquis  de, 
626 

Porges,  H.,  512 
Porphyry,  59 

Porpora,  N.,  270,  277,  279 
Porsile,  G.,  266,  280 
Porta,  C.,  120,  148 

E.,  200 

F.  della,  200 

G.,  283,  292 

Portmann,  J.  G.,  402 
Portogallo,  M.  A.,  451 
Pothier,  J.,  625 
Potter,  C.,  487,  613-4 
Pougin,  A.,  624,  626,  627 
Power,  L.,  83,  98 
Pradher,  L.  B.,  460 
Prager,  F.,  512 
Pratorius,  C.,  132 
H,  132 

J-,  225 

M.,  152,  203,  242-3 

Predieri,  L.  A.,  266,  283 
Preindl,  J.,  396,  493 
Pres  {see  Des  Pres) 
Pressenda,  G.  F.,  237 
Prevost,  E.  P.,  616 
Preyer,  G.,  606,  619 
Printz,  W.  K.,  20,  24* 
Prioris,  J.,  102 


678 

Probst  (firm),  513 
Prochazka,  L.,  610 
Proclus,  59 
Proske,  K.,  606 
Prosniz,  A.,  7,  21 
Provenzale,  F.,  179,  193 
Pruckner,  D.,  536,  578 
Prudent,  E.,  538 
Prumier,  Ange  C.,  597 

Antoine,  470 

Pseudo-Aristotle,  82,  84 
Pseudo- Euclid,  59 
Pseudo-Hucbald,  82 
Ptolemy,  C , 59 
Puccini,  G.,  642 
Pudor,  F.,  573 

H.,573 

Pugnani,  G.,  351 
Punto  ( see  Stich) 

Purcell,  D.,  189,  213 

H.,  189-90,  212,  228, 

241,  292 

Puteanus,  E.,  242 
Pythagoras,  53,  58,  312 

Quadri,  D.,  493 
Quadrio,  F.  S.,  329 
Quagliati,  P.,  172 
Quantz,  J.  J.,  299,  305,  327 
Quatremere  de  Quincy,  A. 
C.,  494 

Quercu,  S.  de,  122,  156 
Quinault,  J.  B.  M.,  183, 
286 

Rachmaninow,  S.f  647 
Rackwitz,  354,  477 
Radecke,  R.,  602 
Radoux,  J.  T.,  619 

Raff,  J.  J-,  536,  576-7 

Raillard,  F.,  625 
Raimondi,  P.,  480-1,  607 
Raison,  A.,  228 
Rameau,  J.  P.,  286-7, 

320,  326,  356,  367 
Ramis  de  Pareja,  B.,  156 
Rampazetto,  F.,  114 
Randegger,  A.,  613 
Randhartinger,  B.,  606 
Raoul  de  Laon,  82 
Rappoldi,  E.,  573 
Rastrelli,  J.,  572 
Rasumowsky  quartet,  423 
Rathgeber,  V.,  264 
Ratti,  L.,  197 
Ratzenberger,  T.,  578 
Ravenscroft,  T.,  150,  212 
Ravina,  J.  H.,  534 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS 


Raymond,  G.  M.,  491,  493 
Read,  D.,  399 
Reay,  S.,  612 
Rebel,  F.,  286 
Rebello,  J.  L.,  21 1 
Reber,  N.  H.,  553,  585,  629 
Rebhun,  P.,  185 
Rebling,  F.,  524 

G.,  605 

Reckendorf,  A.,  524 
Redford,  J.,  144 
Reeve,  W.,  383 
Reeves,  J.  S.,  561 
Reger,  M.,  514 
Regino,  82 
Regis,  J.,  100 
Regnart,  J.,  133 
Reicha,  A.,  492 
Reichardt,  J.  F.,  380,  403, 
405 

L.,  436 

Reichel,  A.,  573 
Reinecke,  K.,  522,  523,  524, 
528 

Reiner,  A.,  202 

J-,  i37.  260 

Reinken,  J.,  226,  262 
Reinsdorf,  O.,  512 
Reinthaler,  K.,  601 
Reissiger,  K.  G.,  431,  483, 
558,  572 

Reissmann,  A.,  20,  21,  514, 
578,  604,  626-7 
Rellstab,  J.  K.  F.,  403 

L.,  630 

Remenyi,  E.,  595 
Remusat,  J.,  596 
Renner,  J.,  606 
Reubke,  J.,  578 
Reuling,  L.  W.,  557 
Reutter,  G.  (1),  266 

G.  (2),  266,  267 

Reyer,  L.  E.  E.,  554,  601 
Reyser,  J.,  113 
Rhaw,  G.,  1 1 5,  157 
Rheinberger,  J.,  586,  619, 
638 

Riccatti,  G.,  401 
Ricci,  F.,  548 

L.,  548 

Riccius,  A.  F.,  525 

K.  A.G.,  573 

Richard  I.,  86 

P.,  627 

Richardson,  V.,  271 
Richault  (firm),  495 
Riche,  A.  de,  137 
Richter,  A.,  524 


Richter,  E.  F.,  514,  524i 

527,  629 

F.  X.,  348^9 

Ricordi  (firm),  495 
Rieck,  K.  F.,  187 
Riedel,  F.  J.,  403 

K.,  525 

Riem,  F.  W.,  485,  525 
Riemann,  H.,  8,  20,  21, 
5i4,  527 
Riepel,  J.,  327 
Ries,  Ferdinand,  422,  457, 
459,  494,  627 

Franz,  422 

H.,  604 

Rieter-Biedermann  (firm), 
630 

Rietz,  J.,  523,  524,  525, 
527-8,  572-3 
Rigati,  G.  A.,  200 
Righi,  F.,  177 
Righini,  V.,  366 
Rimbault,  E.  F.,  626 
Rimski-Korsakow,  N.,  591, 
647 

Rinck,  C.,  484,  494,  496, 

627 

Rinuccini,  O.,  151 
Rippa,  A.  da,  138 
Rischbieter,  W.  A.,  573 
Ristori,  G.  A.,  264,  285 
Ritter,  Alexander,  578 

August  G.,  605 

H.,  21 

Robert  de  Sabilon,  89 
Rochlitz,  J.  F.,  406,  491, 
493,  5i3 

Rockstro,  W.  S.,  20 
Rode,  J.  G.,  597 

P-,  463 

Roder  (firm),  513,  630 

G.  V.,  486 

Roger,  G . H.,  561 
Rogers,  B.,  212,  228,  241 
Rognoni-Taegio,  F.,  242 
Roldan,  J.  P.,  21 1 
Rolla,  A.,  462 
Rolle,  J.  H.,  265 
Rolli,  P.,  293 
Rollig,  K.  L.,  388 
Romberg,  A.,  352,  462 

B.,  352,  468 

Romieu,  325 

Ronchetti-Monteviti,S.,6o7, 

619 

Ronconi,  D.,  456 
Ronger,  F.,  555 
Rontgen,  E.,  523,  524 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS 


679 


Root,  G.  F.,  615 
Roquet,  A.  E.,  626 
Rore,  C.  de,  117,  118,  148, 
221,  260 

Rosellen,  H.,  534 
Rosenhain,  J.,  538 
Rosenmiiller,  J.,  205 
Rossi,  Gaetano,  456 

Giovanni  B.,  242 

Lauro,  548,  619 

Luigi,  177,  178,  182 

M.  A.,  172 

Rossini,  G.,  412,  438,  441- 
4,  446,  452»  496,  546,  548 
Rossler,  F.  A.,  350 
Rost,  F.  W.  E.,  493 
Rosth,  N.,  1 31 
Rothe,  J.  C.,  260 
Rotter,  L.,  606 
Rottmanner,  E.,  606 
Rousseau,  Jean,  241 
Jean  Jacques,  21,  287, 

328»  329 

Roussier,  P.  J.,  402,  405 
Rovelli,  P.,  468 
Rovetta,  G.,  177,  199 
Rovettino  ( see  Volpe) 
Rowbotham,  J.  F.,  20 
Rozkosny,  J.,  646 
Rubert,  J.  M.,  225 
Rubini,  G.  B.,  456 
Rubinstein,  A.,  542-4,  560, 
590-1,  620 

N.,  544,  620 

Riickauf,  A.,  639 
Ruckers  family,  309 
Ruffo,  V.,  122 
Rufinatscha,  J.,  589 
Ruggeri  family,  237 
Riihlmann,  A.  J.,  512,  573 
Rung,  H.,  559 
Rungenhagen,  K.  F.,  436, 
602-3 

Russell,  W.,  399 
Rust,  F.  W.,  352 

W.,  514,  525 

Ruthardt,  A.,  524 
Ryan,  T.,  616 

Sabbatini,  G.,  200 

L.  A.,  401,  405 

Sacchi,  G.,  402,  405 
Sacchini,  A.  M.  G.,  357 
Sachs,  H.,  92,  185 
Sacrati,  P.,  176,  182 
Saffieddin,  85 
Safonow,  W.,  620 
Saint-Huberty,  A.  C.,  378 


Sainton,  P.,  594 
Sainton-Dolby,  C.,  561 
Saint-Saens,  C.,  585,  641 
Sala,  N.,  280,  402 
Salaman,  C.  K.,  614 
Salbinger,  S.,  135 
Saldoni,  B.,  623 
Sale,  F.,  133 

Salieri,  A.,  365-6,  396,  422 
Salinas,  F.,  158 
Salo,  G.  da,  235 
Saloman,  S.,  559 
Salomo,  E.,  83 
Salomon,  J.  P.,  338,  351 

M.,  477 

Salvayre,  G.,  641 
Samara,  S.,  642 
Sammartini,  G.  B.,  324 
Samuel,  A.,  555,  588,  619 
Sances,  G.  F.,  179,  186,  201 
Santini,  F.,  495 
Santley,  C.,  561 
Santucci,  M.,  480 
Sarrette,  B.,  447 
Sarri,  D.,  279 
Sarrus,  596 
Sarti,  G.,  364-5,  395 
Sartorio,  A.,  177 
Sauveur,  J.,  325 
Savart,  F.,  491 
Sax,  A.,  475,  596 

C;  J.,  475 

Scacchi,  M.,  225 
Scaletta,  O.,  242 
Scandello,  A.,  131,  260 
Scaria,  E.,  561 
Scarlatti,  A.,  179,  192-3, 
238,  250,  270,  277-9,  292> 
44i 

D.,  250,  279,  292,  323 

G.,  280 

Schaab,  R.,  525 
Schachner,  R.,  535 
Schacht,  M.  H.,  244 
Schade,  A.,  244 

K.,  622 

Schafhautl,  K.  F.  E.,  629 
Scharfe,  G.,  573 
Scharfenberg,  W.,  616 
Scharwenka,  P.,  647 

X.,  648 

Schebek,  E.,  626 
Schechner,  N.,  456 
Scheibe,  J.  A.,  328,  329 
Scheibler,  J.  H.,  314,  491 
Scheidemann,  H.,  225 
Scheidler,  D.,  464 
Scheidt,  S.,  225 


Schein,  J.  H.,  202-3 
Schelle,  J.,  202 
Schenk,  J.  (1),  240 

J.  (2),  381,  422 

Scherer,  S.  A.,  224 
Schetky,  C.,  352 
Schicht,  J.  G.,  398,  514,  523 
Schick,  M.,  378 
Schiedmayer  (firm),  473 
Schildt,  M.,  225 
Schilling,  G.,  21,  628,  630 
Schillings,  M.,  638 
Schindler,  A.,  423,  627 

P.  C.,  188 

Schira,  F.,  549 
Schirmer  (firm),  616 
Schladebach,  J.,  574 
Schlecht,  R.,  606 
Schleinitz,  K.,  524 
Schlesinger  (firm),  Berlin, 
495 

(firm),  Paris,  495 

Schletterer,  M.,  626 
Schlick,  A.,  136,  221 
Schlimbach,  G.  C.  F.,  403 
Schlosser,  L.,  559 
Schlottmann,  L.,  604 
Schmelzer,  J.  H.,  240 
Schmid,  A.,  627 

B.  (1),  136,  221 

B.  (2),  137,  221 

Schmidt,  G.,  559 
Schmitt,  A.,  460-1 
H.,  536 

J-,  535 

Schnabel,  J.  I.,  482 

M.,  474 

Schneegass,  C.,  158 
Schneider,  F.,  485,  493, 
525 

G.  A.,  353 

Johann  (1),  264 

Johann  (2),  485,  573 

Julius,  604,  605 

K.  E.,  574,  626 

L.,  626 

Schnorr  von  Carolsfeld,  L., 

561.  574 

Schnyder  von  Wartensee, 
X.,  431,  437,  622 
Schoberlechner,  F.,  460 
Schoffer,  P.,  113,  115 
Scholcher,  V.,  627 
Scholz,  B.,  638 
Schop,  J.,  203 
Schott  (firm),  406 
Schottmann,  L.,  536 
Schradiecfc,  H.,  523 


68o 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS 


Schramm,  M.,  137 
Schreck,  G.,  514 
Schrems,  J.,  606 
Schroder,  A.,  524 

K.,  524,  579 

Schroder-Devrient,  W.,  456, 
574 

Schroter,  C.G.,  264,  31 1-2, 
402 

L.,  131 

Schubart,  D.,  403,  405 
Schubert,  A.,  573 

Ferdinand,  483 

Franz  (1),  411-2,  423, 

432~7.  457.  483.  496-7. 
5”,  533.  597.  608 

Franz  (2),  573 

L.,  573 

M.,  574 

Schuberth  (firm),  495,  513 

K.,  595 

Schubiger,  A.,  625 
Schubring,  J.,  627 
Schuch,  E.,  572 
Schucht,  J.,  512 
Schulhof!,  J.,  535 
Schultz,  C.,  260 
Schulz,  C.,  523,  525 

F.,  604 

J.  A.  P.,  380,  403 

Schumann,  C.,  505,  509, 
5”.  525 
G.,  602 

R.,  41 1,  436.  5oi.  503- 

13.  5i5.  520,  526,  533, 
542,  574,  580,  586,  589. 
591-2,  599,  601,  608, 

628-30,  646 
Schund,  J.,  220 
Schuppanzigh,  I.,  423,  467 
Schurer,  J.  G.,  396 
Schurig,  V.,  573 
Schuster,  J.,  365,  396,  572 
Schiitz,  H.,  172,  185-7,  201, 
204-5,  258,  260 
Schwab,  F.,  201 
Schwedler,  M.,  524 
Schweitzer,  A.,  381 
Schwemmer,  H.,  224 
Schwencke,  F.  G.,  605 

J.  F.,  605 

Schwindl,  F.,  350 
Schytte,  L.,  645 
Scotto,  G.,  1 14 

O.,  113 

Scriabine,  A.,  647 
Scribe,  E.,  454,  456,  561 
Sebastiani,  J.,  260 


Sechter,  S.,  423,  606,  629 
Seegr,  J.,  395 
Segond,  L.  A.,  629 
Seidel,  J.  J.,  626 
Seiss,  I.,  536 
Seitz  (firm),  513 
Sejan,  N.,  397 
Selle,  T.,  203 
Sellner,  J.,  469 
Selmer,  J.,  645 
Senefelder,  A.,  406 
Senesino,  294 
Senff  (firm),  513 

B.,  513 

Senfl,  L.,  135 
Serafino,  S.,  237 
Sermisy,  C.  de,  137 
Serow,  A.,  560,  591 
Serre,  J.  A.,  325,  327 
Servais,  A.  F.,  595 
Seven,  F.,  197 
Seydelmann,  F.,  396,  572 
Seyfried,  I.  von,  423,  429, 
482 

Sgambati,  G.,  642 
Sheppard,  J.,  145 
Shield,  W.,  383 
Shore,  J.,  314 
Sibelius,  J.,  648 
Siboni,  E.,  588 
Sieber,  F..  573,  604,  623 
Siefert,  P.,  225 
Siegel  (firm),  513 
Sikemeyer,  619 
Silas,  E.,  614 
Silbermann,  G.,  312 
Silcher,  F.,  437,  622 
Silvestre,  P.,  237 
Simon,  J.  H.,  466 
Simonelli,  M.,  197 
Simpson,  C.,  241,  243 
Simrock  (firm),  406 
Sinding,  C.,  645 
Singer,  E.,  579 

P.,  607 

Sinn,  C.  A.,  325 
Sivori,  C.,  594 
Sixtus,  V.,  65 
Sjogren,  E.,  645 
Skraup,  F.,  557 

J-  N.,  557 

Skuhersky,  F.,  557 
Smareglia,  A.,  642 
Smart,  G.,  488 

H.,  611-2 

Smetana,  F.,  589 
Smith,  J.  C.,  295 
J.  S.,  384 


Smith,  R.,  325 
Snel,  J.  F.,  622 
Soderman,  A.  J.,  645 
Solie,  J.  P.,  370 
Solowiew,  N.,  647 
Somis,  G.  B.,  302 
Sonneck,  O.  G.,  652 
Sontag,  H.,  456 
Sorge,  G.  A.,  325,  327 
Soriano,  F.,  127 
Soriano-Fuertes,  M.,  626 
Sors,  F.,  470 
Soubre,  E.  J.,  619 
Souhaitty,  J.  J.,  243 
Sowinsky,  A.,  532 
Spangenberg,  C.,  158 
Spark,  W.,  612 
Spataro,  G.,  156 
Spazier,  J.  G.  K.,  403,  405 
Speidel,  W.,  536 
Spencer,  H.,  31 
Spiess,  M.,  263,  327 
Spindler,  F.,  535,  573 
Spiridio,  B.,  244 
S pitta,  P.,  627 
Spofforth,  R.,  384 
Spohr,  L.,  423,  430-1.  462, 
464-5,  487,  580,  594,  628 
Spontini,  G.,  440,  452~3. 
497 

Squarcialupi,  A.,  220 
Stabile,  A.,  127 
Stade,  F.,  512 
Staden,  J.,  203,  224 

S.,  185-6,  224 

Stadler,  M.,  396,  493 
Stadlmayr,  J.,  201 
Stainer,  Jakob,  237 

John,  21,  612 

Stamaty,  C.  M.,  534 
Stamitz,  A.,  349 

J-.  303.  347-9.  35i 

K.,  349,  35i 

Stampiglia,  S.,  276 
Stanford,  C.  V.,  643 
Stanley,  A.  A.,  651 

J.,  272 

Stark,  L.,  536 
Stavenhagen,  B.,  579,  586, 
619 

Steffani,  A.,  187,  202,  292 
Steggall,  C.,  612 
Stegmann,  K.  D.,  380 
Steibelt,  D.,  394,  423 
Steigleder,  J.  U.,  224 
Stein,  A.,  387,  473 

E.,  579 

Steinway  (firm),  474 


Stendhal  (see  Beyle) 
Stephens,  C.  E.,  614 
Sterkel,  J.  F.  X.,  381 
Stern,  J.,  602,  619 
Sternhold,  T.,  145 
Stevens,  R.  J.  S.,  384 
Stewart,  R.  P.,  612 
Stich,  J.  W.,  353 
Stobaeus,  J.,  203 
Stockhausen,  F.,  619 
J-.  623 

Stolzel,  G.  H.,  262-3,  289 
Stone,  R.,  145 
Stopel,  F.,  623 
Stor,  K.,  579 
Storace,  A.,  383 

S.,  383 

Storck,  K.,  21 
Storioni,  L.,  237 
Stossel,  C.,  329 
Stradella,  A.,  179,  193 
Stradivari  family,  237 
Strauss,  J.  (1),  598 

J-  0).  598 

R-,  579.  586,  638-9 

Streicher,  J.  A.,  387 

M.,  387 

N.,  387 

Striggio,  A.,  1 21,  148,  151 
Strozzi,  P.,  1 51 
Strunck,  D.,  225 

N.  A.,  186,  240 

Stuck,  B.,  286,  304 
Stuntz,  J.  H.,  586 
Suard,  J.  B.  A.,  403 
Suevus  (see  Schwab) 
Sullivan,  A.,  643 
Sulzer,  J.  G.,  403,  406 

S.,  605 

Suppe,  F.  von,  557 
Surman,  J.,  615 
Susato,  T.,  115 
Siissmayr,  F.  X.,  381 
Svendsen,  J.,  525,  645 
Sweelinck,  J.,  142,  221, 

223-5 

Swoboda,  Adalbert,  20 

August,  493 

Sylvester,  Pope,  73 
Szekely,  I.,  535 
Szymanowska,  M.,  460, 

532 

Tacchinardi,  G.,  619 

N,  456 

Tadolini,  G.,  439 
Taegio  (see  Rognoni) 

Tag,  C.  G.,  398 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS 


Taglichsbeck,  T.,  467 
Tailler,  S.,  83 
Tallis,  T.,  115,  144,  145 
Tamberlik,  E.,  561 
Tamburini,  A.,  456  % 

Tanejew,  S.,  620 
Tapissier,  95 
Tarditi,  O.,  200 
Tartini,  G.,  302,  325,  327, 
35° 

Taubert,  W.,  558,  585,  587, 
603 

Tausch,  F.,  353 
Tausig,  A.,  532,  573 

K.,  545,  578 

Taverner,  J.,  143 
Tecchler,  D.,  237 
Tedesco,  I.  A.,  535 
Telemann,  G.  M.,  398 

G.  P.,  260,  262,  288, 

292.  320 

Terradeglias,  D.,  281,  292 
Tessarini,  C.,  303 
Testore  family,  237 
Thalberg,  S.,  537-8 
Thayer,  A.  W.,  627 
Theile,  J.,  186,  207,  260, 
262 

Theinred,  A.,  83 
Theodoricus,  83 
Theogerus,  82 
Theon,  59 
Thibaut  IV.,  86 

A.  F.  J.,  493.  495 

Thiele,  L.,  604,  605 
Thierfelder,  A.,  638 
Thoinan  (see  Roquet) 
Thomas,  A.,  447,  552 

A.  G.,  643 

C.  G.,  404 

J-»  597 

T.,  616,  648 

Thomelin,  J.,  228 
Thomson,  G.,  405 
Thorne,  E.  H.,  612 
Thiirlings,  A.,  527 
Thumer,  F.  E.,  469 
Tichatschek,  J.  A.,  561,  574 
Tiersch,  O.,  527,  629 
Tietjens,  T.,  561 
Tilmant,  T.,  585 
Timm,  H.  C.,  616 
Tinctoris,  J.,  21,  98,  156 
Tinel,  E.,  641 
Titl,  A.  E.,  557 
Titow,  N.,  610 
Todi,  L.  R.  de  A.,  378 
Toeschi,  G.  B.,  349 


68 1 

Tolbecque,  J.  B.  J.,  598 
Tomaschek,  J.  W.,  461 
Tomkins,  T.,  212 
Tommasi,  G.  M.,  244 
Topfer,  J.  G.,  579,  605,  626 
Topler,  M.,  606 
Torelli,  G.,  240 
Torn,  P.,  187,  283 
Torrington,  F.  H.,  616 
Tosi,  G.  F.,  191 
Tottmann,  A.  K.,  514 
Tours,  B.,  612 
Tourte,  F.,  354,  462 
Trabacci,  G.  M.,  223 
Traetta,  F.,  616 

T.,  356,  395 

Trapassi,  P.,  276,  293 
Trautwein  (firm),  495 
Travers,  J.,  272 
Trebelli,  Z.,  561 
Treiber,  W.,  525 
Trento,  V.,  438 
Treu,  D.  G.,  283 
Tricarico,  G.,  177,  178 
Tritto,  G.,  358,  395 
Tromlitz,  J.  G.,  403 
Truhn,  F.  H.,  512 
Tschaikowski,P.,59i,  646-7 
Tschirch,  K.  A.,  512 

W.,  601 

Tschudi,  B.,  387 
Tudway,  T.,  213 
Tulou,  J.  L.,  469 
Tuma,  F.,  267 
Tunder,  F.,  225 
Tunstede,  S.,  83 
Turk,  D.  G.,  401,  402 
Turle,  J.,  61 1 
Turner,  W.,  213 
Tumhout,  G.  de,  141 

J.  de,  141 

Turpin,  E.  H.,  612 
Tye,  C.,  144 

Uber,  H.,  573 
Uccellini,  M.,  239 
Udalschalk,  82 
Ugolini,  B.,  329 

V.,  196,  222 

Ugolino  di  Ferrara,  83 

Uhlig,  T.,  573 

Uhbischew,  A.  d’,  627 
Umlauf,  I.,  381 
Untersteiner,  A.,  21 
Urban,  C.,  622 
Urhan,  C.,  466 
Ursillo,  F.,  305 
Utendal,  A.,  133 


682 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS 


Vaccai,  N.,  623 
Vaet,  J.,  133 
Valderravano,  E.  de,  140 
Valente,  A.,  221 
Valentini,  P.  F.,  177,  196 
Valle,  G.  della,  405 
Vallotti,  F.  A.,  269,  401 
Vanderstraeten,  E.,  625 
Vanneo,  S.,  157 
Vecchi,  Orazio,  121,  148, 
169 

Orfeo,  122 

Veit,  W.  H.,  589 
Venatorini  (see  Misli- 
weczek) 

Vento,  I.  de,  135 
Veracini,  A.,  240 

F.  M.,  302 

Verbonnet,  J.,  102 
Verdi,  G.,  546-8,  635 
Verdonck,  C.,  141 
Verhulst,  J.,  525,  588 
Vernizzi,  O.,  172 
Verovio,  S.,  114 
Verschuere-Reynvaan,  J., 
406 

Vesque  von  Puttlingen,  J, 
557 

Vetter,  N.,  228 
Viardot-Garcia,  P.,  561 
Vicentino,  N.,  123,  157 
Victoria,  T.  L.  da,  127,  260 
Vielmis,  B.,  117 
Vierdanck,  J.,  226 
Vierling,  G.,  604 

J-  G.,  399 

Vieuxtemps,  H.,  594 
Vilbac,  R.  de,  534 
Villars,  F.  de,  630 
Villoing,  A.,  535 
Villoteau,  G.  A.,  491,  493 
Vincent  de  Beauvais,  83 
— H.  J.,  629 
Vinci,  L.,  280 
P.,  121 

Viola,  A.  della,  121,  148 

F.,  121 

Viole,  R.,  578,  604 
Viotta,  H.,  619 
Viotti,  G,  B.,  351,  462 
Virdung,  S.,  152,  156 
Vitali,  F.,  172 

G.  B.,  239 

T.,  239 

Vitruvius,  59 
Vittori,  L.,  172,  178 
Vittoria  (see  Victoria) 
Vivaldi,  A.,  301 


Vogel,  A.,  556 

B.,  512 

M.,  21,  525 

Vogler,  J.  G.,  354,  396-7, 
401-3,  423,  477 
Vogt,  G.,  469 

J-,  536 

Voigt,  J.  G.  H.,  525 
Volckmar,  W.,  605 
Volkert,  F.,  431 
Volkland,  A.,  525 
Volkmann,  R.,  509,  586, 
589,  609 

Vollbeding,  J.  C.,  403 
Volpe,  G.,  177,  199 
Voss,  C.,  535 

G.  J.,  243 

Vroye,  T.  J.  de,  624 
Vuillaume,  J.  B.,  237,  474 
Vulpius,  M.,  157,  203,  260 

Wach,  K.  G.  W.,  524 
Wachtel,  T.,  561 
Waelrant,  R.,  139,  141 
Wagenseil,  G.  C.,  266,  283, 
324,  350 

J.  C.,  244 

Wagner,  E.  D.,  604 

K.  J.,  470 

R.,  41 1,  424,  429,  497. 

503,  525.  539.  542-3,  546, 
557,  559,  561,  562-72, 
574-5,  580-1,  584-6,  589- 
91,  596,  601,  628-30, 

631-2,  635-7 
Waldersee,  P.  von,  514 
Walker,  J.  C.,  405 
Wallace,  W.  V.,  613 
Wallis,  J.,  243,  244 
Walliser,  C.  T.,  203,  242 
Walmisley,  T.  F.,  489 
Walsyngham,  T.,  83 
Walter,  I.,  381 

W.H.,615 

Walther,  J.,  130,  260 

J.  G.,  21,  263,  329, 

406 

J.  J.,  240 

Walzel,  C.,  561 
Wanhal,  J.  B.,  350,  390 
Wasielewski,  J.  von,  524, 
627 

Webb,  G.  J.,  615 
Webbe,  S.  (1),  384 

S.  (2),  384 

Weber,  A.,  373 

C.  M.  von,  33,  41 1, 

412,  423,  424-8,  429, 


432,  437,  446,  452,  457. 
486,  496-7,  5°8,  556, 
562,  567,  572,  597 

C.,  374 

D.,  493,  619 

E.  H.,  491,  314 

F.,  601 

G.,  491-4,  628 

M.  M.,  627 

Wecker,  G.  K.,  224 
Weckmann,  M.,  226 
Weelkes,  T.,  149,  212 
Weerbecke,  G.,  xoo,  122 
Wegeler,  F.  G.,  627 
Wehle,  K.,  536 
Weidenbach,  J.,  524 
Weigl,  J.,  423,  429,  482 
Weingartner,  F.,  638 
Weinlig,  C.  E.,  399,  573 

T.,  514,  573 

Weiss,  F.,  423,  468 
Weitzmann,  K.  F.,  604,  626, 
629 

Welcker  von  Gontershau- 
sen,  H.,  629 
Weldon,  J.,  189,  271 
Wellesley  (see  Mornington) 
Wendelstein(  see  Coch- 
laeus) 

Wendt,  E.,  604 

J.  G.,  491,  494 

Wenzel,  E.,  512,  524 
Werckmeister,  A.,  227,  244 
Wermann,  F.  O.,  573 
Werner,  J.  G.,  485,  493 
Werstowski,  A.,  560,  610 
Wert,  J.  van,  121,  148 
Wesley,  C.,  487 

S.,  399,  484,  487 

S.  S.,  611 

Wesselack,  J.  G.,  606 
Westbrook,  W.  J.,  612 
Westmeyer,  W.,  559 
Westmoreland,  Earl  of,  489 
Westphal,  R.,  624 
Wettauer,  J.  G.,  404 
Wheatstone,  C.,  478 
Whistling,  C.  F.,  494 
Whyte,  R.,  145 
Widerkehr,  J.  C.  M.,  353 
Widor,  C.,  641 
Wieck,  C (see  Schumann, 
C.) 

F.,  460,  504-5,  512, 

525 

Wieniawski,  H.,  532,  595 

J-,  538 

Wieprecht,  W.  F.,  475,  596 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS 


683 


Wilbye,  J.,  149 
Wilhelm  von  Hirschau,  82 
Wilhem,  G.  L.,  601,  622 
Wilhorski  brothers,  468 
Wilke,  C.  F G.,  626 
Willaert,  A.,  116-8,  148,  221 
Willent,  J.  B.  J.,  597 
William  of  Poitiers,  86 
Willmers,  H.  R.,  538 
Wilm,  N.  von,  536 
Winding,  A.,  536,  644 
Winter,  P.  von,  366,  397, 
586 

Winterberger,  A.,  525,  536, 
578 

Winterfeld,  K.  von,  604, 
625,  627 
Wise.  M.,  212 
Witt,  Franz,  606 

Friedrich,  467 

Wohlfahrt,  H.,  525 
Woldemar,  M.,  352 
Wolf,  E.  W.,  350,  402 

F.,  626 

G.  F.,  406 

H.,  639 

Wolff,  E.,  532 
Wolff,  J.,  393,  404,  423 
Wolkenstein,  D.,  137 
Wollanck,  F.,  436 
Wollenhaupt,  H.  A.,  616 
Wdlick,  N.,  156 


Woltz,  J.,  221 
Wonnegger,  J.  L.,  157 
Wooldridge,  H.  E.,  21 
Worde,  W.  de,  115 
Wornum,  R.,  474 
Woyrsch,  F.  von,  638 
Wranitsky,  P.,  350 
Wtierst,  R.,  587 
Wiillner,  F.,  572,  573,  586 
Wunderlich,  J.  G.,  353 
Wiirfel,  W.,  532 
Wiirzbach,  K.,  627 
Wyngaerde,  A.,  100 

Xyndas,  S.,  610 

Yost,  M.,  353 
Young,  J.  M.  W.,  612 

M.,  401 

Yriarte,  T.  de,  402 

Zabalza  y Claso,  D.,  534 
Zacconi,  L.,  158 
Zachau,  F.  W.,  227,  290, 
292 

Zamminer,.  F.,  629 
Zanardini,  A.,  561 
Zang,  J.  H.,  403 
Zani  de  Ferranti,  M.  A.,  470 
Zannettini  ( see  Gianettini) 
Zaremba,  N.,  620 
Zarlino,  G.,  117-8,  157-8 


Zarzycki,  A.,  532,  619 
Zeelandia,  H.  de,  83,  95 
Zelenka,  J.  D.,  263 
Zelenski,  L.,  647 
Zell  ( see  Walzel) 

Zelter,  K.  F.,  405,  436,  600, 
602 

Zenger,  M.,  638 
Zeno,  A.,  276 
Zerrahn,  C.,  616 
Zeugheer,  J.,  467-8 
Ziani,  M.  A.,  179,  191,  266, 
282 

P.  A.,  177,  178 

Zichy,  G.,  646 
Zimmerman,  P.  J.  G.,  460 
Zingarelli,  N.  A.,  359,  395, 
619 

Zipoh,  D.,  269 
Zoilo,  A.,  127 
Zollner,  H.,  514 

K.,  525,  601 

K.  H.,  485 

Zopff,  H.,  512 
Zuan  Maria,  117 
Zuane,  117 
Zumpe,  H.,  586 

J-»  385 

Zumsteeg,  J.  R.,  380 
Zwingli,  U.,  138-9 
Zwintscher,  B.,  524 


